The Supreme Court has assured that a communication will be issued regarding the action taken by the Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, following the submission of a confidential report on May 4, 2025, by a three-member in-house inquiry committee. The committee investigated the discovery of half-burnt currency notes on the premises of the official Delhi residence of former Delhi High Court judge, Justice Yashwant Varma, after a blaze on March 14, 2025.
The committee, constituted by Chief Justice Khanna on March 22, 2025, to conduct an in-depth probe into the incident, examined available forensic material, call and internet data records, and witnesses, including police and fire officers present at the site. In line with principles of natural justice, Justice Varma was reportedly given an opportunity to appear before the committee and counter any allegations.
Media reports thus far have indicated that the committee confirmed the presence of cash at the premises.
The inquiry panel was tasked by the CJI to investigate three specific questions: how Justice Varma accounts for the money allegedly found in the room; the source of this money; and who removed it from the room on March 15, the day after the fire.
The Chief Justice of India has forwarded the panel’s report to Justice Varma, who was transferred to the Allahabad High Court in April 2025, following the incident. Justice Varma is required to respond to the inquiry panel’s report.
The Supreme Court indicated that Chief Justice Khanna has multiple options depending on the contents of the report. If the committee has concluded that there is substance in the allegations warranting the initiation of proceedings for the judge’s removal, the Chief Justice would directly advise the judge to resign or seek voluntary retirement. However, if the judge refuses this advice, the CJI would then inform the President and the Prime Minister of the committee’s findings, which could necessitate the initiation of formal removal proceedings.
A 1991 Constitution Bench judgment in the K. Veeraswami vs Union of India case established that a criminal case could be registered against a sitting High Court judge, a Chief Justice of a High Court, or a Supreme Court judge, but only after consultation with the Chief Justice of India.
The report of the committee, dated May 3, 2025, was prepared by Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana; Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh; and Justice Anu Sivaraman, a judge of the High Court of Karnataka.
The decision to form this committee was based on a preliminary enquiry report submitted by the Delhi High Court Chief Justice, D.K. Upadhyaya, on March 21, 2025, which had recommended a “deeper probe” into the allegations.
Published – May 08, 2025 04:18 am IST
