New Delhi– In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India on Thursday rejected the petition filed by Justice Yashwant Varma of the Allahabad High Court challenging the findings of a three-judge in-house inquiry committee and the subsequent recommendation by former Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna to initiate impeachment proceedings against him.
A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih dismissed the plea, which claimed that Justice Varma was not granted a fair opportunity to present his defense during the inquiry process. The court found no merit in the argument and upheld the validity of the in-house mechanism.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Justice Varma, faced tough questions from the bench. The judges pointedly asked why Justice Varma had chosen to appear before the panel if he believed the inquiry process was unconstitutional and why he raised objections only after the panel submitted its report.
“There have been instances where judges have refused to appear before such panels. Then why did you appear? Did you expect a favorable decision?” the bench questioned.
“You’re a constitutional authority. You cannot claim ignorance. These concerns should have been raised at the outset,” the court remarked.
The controversy began after a fire broke out at Justice Varma’s residence in Delhi on March 14, during his tenure as a judge of the Delhi High Court. During the firefighting efforts, large amounts of unaccounted cash were allegedly discovered by fire officials. Justice Varma was not present at the residence during the incident.
The in-house inquiry panel was subsequently constituted by the then CJI Sanjiv Khanna to probe the matter. After reviewing the findings, the panel recommended that impeachment proceedings be initiated against Justice Varma — a recommendation now accepted by the judiciary and executive arms.
In response to the court’s decision, Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju announced that the motion for Justice Varma’s removal will be introduced in the Lok Sabha first, followed by concurrence from the Rajya Sabha.
“All political parties are on the same page. The removal of Justice Yashwant Varma must be a joint decision. It’s not just a government action, but a responsibility of the entire Parliament,” Rijiju told reporters.
“Efforts are ongoing. The matter concerns corruption in the judiciary, and it is imperative that we act unitedly and decisively,” he added.
If approved by both Houses of Parliament, the motion will mark a rare and serious step in India’s judicial history — the impeachment of a sitting High Court judge.
