Enough water has flown down Yamuna since the "burnt cash" episode at the residence of Justice Yashwant Varma (JYV) made headlines. Work in the Allahabad High Court had come to a halt from March 25 for a week. However, the Allahabad Bar Association has now decided to suspend its boycott of judicial work until the Inquiry Committee’s report is released. Work was set to resume on April 1.
In-House Inquiry Committee's
Investigation
The in-house Inquiry Committee held its first meeting on March 26 and subsequently visited JYV’s residence. It spent more than an hour analyzing CCTV footage and later recorded the statements of Fire Brigade personnel.
Casual Visit by Delhi Police Team
A Delhi Police team visited JYV’s residence on March 25 to question the staff and security personnel present on the night of March 14. They sealed the storeroom where the currency notes were found. Earlier, the phones of five policemen who had rushed to the judge’s residence on March 14 had been surrendered. It is surprising that the police's visit was delayed. They could have seized the currency notes during the intervening night of March 14 and 15.
Some Collegium members have expressed concerns that in such a serious situation, merely transferring the concerned judge would not only tarnish the judiciary’s image but also erode public trust in the institution.
Supreme Court Hearing on Plea for Filing
FIR
On March 26, Chief Justice of India (CJI) heard Advocate Mathews Nedumpara’s (M.N.) plea seeking permission to file an FIR against JYV. The CJI advised him not to make any public statements and assured that the court registry would provide a hearing date. On March 28, a bench comprising Justice A.S. Oka and Justice U. Bhuyan declined to entertain the plea, stating that the CJI could direct the registration of an FIR if necessary after the in-house inquiry. The bench deemed the petition premature.
Meeting Between CJI and Bar Association
Presidents
On March 27, the CJI met with the presidents of six bar associations—Delhi, Allahabad, Lucknow, Kerala, Karnataka, and Gujarat—to seek their cooperation. They also met four Collegium members, raising several demands, including criminal action regarding the discovery of cash at JYV’s residence. They flagged concerns about judicial corruption. The Collegium acknowledged their concerns and reiterated the need for a clean judiciary.
Earlier, bar representatives had expressed appreciation for the CJI’s transparency in publishing relevant material on the Supreme Court website. They demanded that JYV’s transfer proposal be canceled and that he be stripped of both judicial and administrative duties while facing criminal prosecution.
In another positive development, the head of the Allahabad High Court Bar Association (AHCBA) held discussions with the Ministry of Law.
Opinions of Senior Judges and Advocates
- Harish Salve, former Solicitor General, emphasized that the judiciary must remain above suspicion. He argued that the system, not just the judge, is on trial. He criticized the Collegium system, calling it ineffective and the in-house inquiry unfair. He suggested that a judge and two independent members be part of the investigation before the CBI takes over.
- Dushyant Dave, former President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, contended that the judiciary has been deteriorating due to inefficiency and lack of accountability. He criticized corrupt judges who misuse judicial independence and called for the immediate removal of the Collegium system. He advocated for a nationwide debate, highlighting that common people suffer the most.
- Kapil Sibal, Senior Advocate and MP, called for a more transparent judicial appointment system, pointing out that the judiciary has failed to respond effectively to corruption and misconduct.
- Prashant Bhushan, Senior Counsel, reiterated the need for strong and independent judges. He noted that while dossiers are maintained on judges, the government takes months or even years to notify Collegium recommendations. He opposed post-retirement assignments for judges.
- Justice (Retd) S.N. Dhingra candidly admitted that judicial corruption has existed for a long time and is increasing. He criticized judges who believe they are above the law. He argued that police should have sealed JYV’s storeroom on March 14 to secure the premises and stated that an FIR could have been registered based on reports of burnt currency notes. He also called for a revival of discussions on the NJAC (National Judicial Appointments Commission) of 2014.
Judges Who Faced Potential Impeachment
- Justice V. Ramaswami (Supreme Court): Found guilty of misusing public funds but escaped impeachment due to a lack of majority support in Parliament.
- Justice P.D. Dinakaran (Madras High Court): Accused of disproportionate assets and misconduct; faced impeachment but was transferred instead.
- Justice C.S. Karnan (Calcutta High Court): Found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment.
- Justice S.N. Shukla (Allahabad High Court): Charged with corruption and possessing disproportionate assets; retired without impeachment.
- Justice Saumitra Sen (Calcutta High Court): Found guilty of misappropriating public funds and misconduct.
- Justice Nirmal Yadav (Punjab & Haryana High Court): Accused of accepting bribes; acquitted after 17 years of legal proceedings, but the stigma remains.
Government Approves Justice Varma's
Transfer
In a sudden development, the President of India has approved Justice Yashwant Varma’s transfer to the Allahabad High Court. This action was expected following the submission of the Internal Inquiry Committee’s report. The order must now be implemented immediately.
Additionally, the Supreme Court has announced that the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court has been directed not to assign any judicial work to Justice Varma upon his transfer.
Predicting future developments remains difficult. With Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna set to retire on May 13, 2025, his successor's stance on the issue remains unknown. The final outcome is, therefore, likely to be delayed further.
Conclusion
This unfortunate saga has not yet concluded. Much has transpired, and more is bound to unfold. Family legacy and professional relationships must give way to merit and accountability. Justice Varma's case deserves serious scrutiny. The judiciary must not become a marketplace where justice is bought and sold. A TV debate recently cited a study indicating that 52% of litigants in India have to pay bribes to advance their cases, in addition to enduring endless delays.
Has the judiciary become a platform for power and money?
