Supreme Court Dismisses Judge’s Plea in ‘Half-Burnt Cash’ Scandal – Says Conduct “Does Not Inspire Confidence”
In a dramatic turn in one of the judiciary’s most talked-about controversies this year, the Supreme Court of India on Thursday dismissed the plea of Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma, who had challenged an in-house inquiry report that found him guilty of serious misconduct.
The Case That Shook the Corridors of Justice
The controversy began in March this year when a large stash of half-burnt cash was discovered in the storeroom of Justice Varma’s official residence in Delhi after a late-night fire broke out.
The three-judge inquiry committee, headed by Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, conducted a 10-day probe, examined 55 witnesses, and personally inspected the site of the blaze.
According to the panel’s findings, Justice Varma and his family had either covert or direct control over the storeroom where the cash was found — a fact the committee said established serious misconduct warranting his removal from office.
Supreme Court’s Strong Words
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A.G. Masih held that the in-house inquiry process was lawful, thorough, and constitutionally sound. The court observed that due procedure was meticulously followed, rejecting Justice Varma’s claim that the process was unfair. Justice Varma’s conduct does not inspire confidence,” the bench remarked, adding that the Chief Justice of India cannot function merely as a “post office” but must act decisively when judicial misconduct is suspected.
Plea Against Removal Recommendation Fails
Justice Varma had also sought to quash the May 8 recommendation of then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna urging Parliament to begin impeachment proceedings against him.
But the Supreme Court ruled that:
The in-house mechanism is a valid process within the constitutional framework
The recommendation for removal was not unconstitutional
There was no violation of fundamental rights
However, the bench clarified that Justice Varma is free to present his defence if and when impeachment proceedings begin in Parliament.
Earlier Court Exchanges
During hearings, the court asked why Justice Varma approached the apex court only after the inquiry committee had already found him guilty. His defence argued that the panel had “reversed the burden of proof”, rushed the process, and relied on a “preconceived narrative” instead of giving him a full and fair hearing.
But the top court remained unconvinced, saying procedural fairness had been upheld.
Other Petitions Also Dismissed
The court also threw out a separate petition filed by advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara, who wanted an FIR registered against Justice Varma for alleged “abuse of the process of court”.
This judgment is not just a setback for Justice Varma — it is a loud and clear message from the Supreme Court that judicial accountability will be pursued to its logical end, no matter the stature of the person involved.
#SupremeCourt #Judiciary #JudicialAccountability #YashwantVarma #BreakingNews #DelhiHighCourt #AllahabadHighCourt #IndianJudiciary #JudicialMisconduct #HalfBurntCash #FireScandal #JusticeForJustice #SCVerdict #RuleOfLaw #LegalNews #IndiaNews #CorruptionCase #HighCourtJudge #ViralNews #CourtUpdates #JusticePrevails #LawAndOrder
