New Delhi: A parliamentary committee constituted by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to investigate the recovery of cash from the official residence of former Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Varma has held him responsible in the matter, concluding that he failed to explain the presence of the money satisfactorily.
According to details of the committee’s report accessed by IANS and tabled in Parliament on Wednesday, the panel found that large quantities of unexplained Rs 500 currency notes were discovered in a storeroom at Justice Varma’s official residence at 30, Tughlak Crescent in New Delhi.
The controversy arose after a fire broke out at the residence on the night of March 14, 2025. Firefighters responding to the blaze allegedly found substantial amounts of partially burnt cash in the storeroom.
In its report, the committee said Justice Varma could not provide a credible explanation regarding the source, ownership, or presence of the currency notes.
The panel also raised concerns over the handling of the subsequent investigation, noting that key evidence was neither properly secured nor preserved. It observed that the condition of the storeroom was altered before it could be lawfully sealed and examined.
Further, the report pointed to the unexplained disappearance or unavailability of the recovered currency notes. It attributed the loss of material evidence to failures in preserving the scene and to the disturbance of the storeroom by personnel attached to the residence.
At the same time, the committee said it found no evidence to establish that Justice Varma personally removed the cash.
Criticising the former judge’s response, including his March 22, 2025 written explanation, the panel said it was unsatisfactory and lacked candour, transparency, and institutional accountability.
The report comprises two volumes and includes oral testimonies as well as documentary evidence gathered during the inquiry.
Earlier, an in-house panel set up by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had concluded that Justice Varma exercised “active or tacit control” over the storeroom where the cash was found.
Justice Varma, who was serving in the Delhi High Court at the time, was later transferred back to his parent court, the Allahabad High Court, following the controversy.
Parliament subsequently initiated proceedings for his removal. However, after Justice Varma resigned from office, the removal process effectively became infructuous.
(IANS)
