New Delhi: A three-member inquiry committee constituted by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla has found all three charges against former Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma proved in connection with the discovery of unexplained cash at his official residence in New Delhi, as per its report tabled in both Houses of Parliament on Wednesday.
The committee, constituted under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, examined allegations arising from the discovery of large quantities of burnt Rs 500 currency notes in a storeroom at Justice Varma’s official residence at 30, Tughlaq Crescent, New Delhi. The cash was reportedly discovered after a fire broke out at the premises on the intervening night of March 14 and 15, 2025, when Varma was serving as a judge of the Delhi High Court.
In its consolidated findings, the committee said the allegations concerning unexplained cash, disturbance of evidence, and Justice Varma’s explanations had been established. It concluded that he had failed to provide a satisfactory account of the presence, ownership, or source of the money found in the storeroom.
The panel also raised serious concerns about what happened at the site after the fire. According to its report, material evidence was not adequately secured or preserved, while the condition of the storeroom was disturbed before it could be lawfully sealed and inspected. The committee considered this significant while assessing the circumstances surrounding the discovery of the cash.
Justice Varma’s explanations also came under sustained scrutiny. The committee said his response did not demonstrate the candour, transparency, and institutional responsibility expected from a judge of a constitutional court. It described his explanation as evasive and unsatisfactory when tested against the statements of independent official witnesses and other corroborative material.
The report further noted that Justice Varma advanced several possible explanations for the presence of the cash, including the possibility that it had been planted or that there had been a conspiracy involving others. However, the committee said no supporting evidence was produced to substantiate these theories.
A particularly significant aspect of the inquiry was the committee’s examination of Justice Varma’s interaction with members of his staff at around 2 a.m. following the fire. The report said he did not adequately disclose what was discussed during the interaction or what instructions, if any, were issued. The committee noted that the relevant staff members were not examined in his defence to explain the communication.
The panel also drew an adverse inference from the absence of any FIR or formal complaint alleging that the cash had been planted or that evidence had been tampered with. The failure to produce relevant staff as defence witnesses was another factor considered while evaluating Justice Varma’s account.
The latest findings follow an earlier in-house inquiry ordered by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna. That committee had concluded that Justice Varma had “active or tacit control” over the storeroom where the cash was found, adding to the seriousness of the allegations.
Justice Varma was subsequently repatriated to his parent court, the Allahabad High Court, amid the controversy. In July 2025, more than 200 Members of Parliament signed a motion seeking his removal. The following month, Speaker Birla constituted the three-member Judges Inquiry Committee to examine the charges.
The committee submitted its findings to the Speaker in May. The report has now been formally presented before Parliament in two volumes containing oral and documentary evidence collected during the investigation.
Justice Varma has since resigned, meaning the parliamentary removal proceedings have effectively become infructuous. However, his resignation has reportedly not yet been formally notified by the Law Ministry.
The report nevertheless assumes significance because it records, after a statutory inquiry, the committee’s conclusion that all three charges were proved. It places on record the panel’s assessment of the unexplained cash, the handling of evidence at the residence and Justice Varma’s response to the allegations, marking a significant chapter in the controversy surrounding the former judge.
(IANS)
