
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea seeking an FIR and SIT probe against former Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma over the cash-at-home controversy, calling it 'cheap publicity'. The Bench…
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea seeking an FIR and SIT probe against former Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma over the cash-at-home controversy, calling it 'cheap publicity'. The Bench of Justice BR Gavai Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe told petitioner-advocate Ghanshyam Upadhyay that the court had already rejected similar petitions.

Justice Varma resigned in April amid impeachment proceedings after burnt currency notes were found at his official residence in Delhi following a fire in March 2025. An in-house inquiry committee had prima facie found his culpability, and reports were made public by the Supreme Court. The petitioner argued that since Varma had resigned, he no longer enjoyed immunity under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985.

This case shows how a serious judicial scandal can be dragged into PIL circus. Both sides have a point: the in-house inquiry was thorough and made public, but the petitioner wants criminal accountability now that the judge has resigned. The court was right to call it cheap publicity if the petitioner was just grandstanding. But the real test is whether the CBI or ED will act independently on the complaint without a court order. The public disclosure of the inquiry report was a good step.
Sources (2): timesnownews.com, livelaw.in
This story was synthesised by AI from the 2 sources linked above.
Updated: this story now draws on 2 sources.