High Court Judge Yashwant Varma Challenges Impeachment Over Cash Recovery Allegations

High Court Judge Yashwant Varma Challenges Impeachment Over Cash Recovery Allegations

Justice Varma’s petition coincides with a separate plea urging the Delhi Police and Enforcement Directorate to register an FIR and investigate the cash recovery as a “culpable and cognizable offense.”

By RMN News Service

NEW DELHI, July 18, 2025 — Justice Yashwant Varma, a sitting judge of the Allahabad High Court, has filed a petition in the Supreme Court to challenge the recommendation for his impeachment following the discovery of a large amount of unaccounted cash at his former official residence in Delhi. The move comes just days before the Monsoon Session of Parliament, where the Centre is expected to table an impeachment motion against him.

The controversy began on March 14, 2025, when a fire at Justice Varma’s Lutyens Delhi residence led to the discovery of burnt and partially burnt currency notes. A three-member judicial panel, appointed by then-Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, investigated the incident and concluded that there was “strong inferential evidence” of Justice Varma’s control over the storeroom where the cash was found. 

The panel’s report, submitted on May 4, 2025, found the allegations of misconduct serious enough to warrant impeachment proceedings, citing Justice Varma’s failure to provide a credible explanation for the source of the cash.

Justice Varma, who was transferred from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court on April 5, 2025, and stripped of judicial work, has denied the allegations, calling them a conspiracy. 

[ न्यायाधीश के ख़िलाफ़ महाभियोग और भ्रष्टाचार का ऑडियो विश्लेषण ]

In his Supreme Court petition, he argues that the inquiry committee failed to investigate key facts and wrongly shifted the burden of proof onto him, requiring him to disprove unverified claims. He has sought a declaration that the recommendation for his removal, forwarded by former CJI Khanna to the President and Prime Minister, be deemed unconstitutional.

The impeachment process, governed by Articles 124(4) and 218 of the Constitution and the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, requires a motion supported by at least 100 Lok Sabha or 50 Rajya Sabha members. If tabled, the motion would mark a rare attempt to impeach a High Court judge, with no such motion having succeeded in India’s history. 

The government, led by Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju, is reportedly seeking consensus among political parties for the unprecedented move, emphasizing that it is a matter of addressing judicial corruption rather than a political issue.

Justice Varma’s petition also coincides with a separate plea urging the Delhi Police and Enforcement Directorate to register an FIR and investigate the cash recovery as a “culpable and cognizable offense.” As the Monsoon Session approaches, the case continues to fuel debates over judicial accountability and the integrity of India’s judiciary.