NEW DELHI: Delhi High Court Judge Yashwant Varma is currently embroiled in a controversy surrounding the discovery of cash in his official residence after a fire incident. In response, the Chief Justice of the High Court has initiated an in-house inquiry against him. The Supreme Court has clarified that the proposal to transfer Judge Varma to the Allahabad High Court is unrelated to the ongoing investigation.
Judge Varma, the second most senior judge in the Delhi High Court, was appointed on October 11, 2021. The discovery of the cash occurred after a fire broke out at his residence in Lutyens Delhi on March 14. The exact amount of cash found has not been disclosed.
Initial reports of the incident were published by The Times of India, stating that the fire led to the discovery of a significant sum of money, prompting the Supreme Court collegium, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, to consider transferring Judge Varma. However, the Delhi Fire Services Chief, Atul Garg, later clarified that no cash was found during their operation at the judge’s residence.
The situation has caused shock within the judiciary and legal community. The Supreme Court’s clarification regarding the transfer proposal aims to separate the two issues and ensure transparency in the process.
The control room received a call about a fire at Justice Varma’s residence at 11:35 pm on March 14. Two fire tenders were immediately dispatched to the scene, as confirmed by Garg in a statement to PTI.
The fire tenders arrived at 11:43 pm and found the fire in a store room filled with stationery and household items. It took 15 minutes to extinguish the flames, with no reported casualties.
Following the containment of the fire, the authorities notified the police about the incident. The fire department team then left the scene, confirming that no cash was found during the operation, according to the DFS chief.
The incident sparked controversy within the legal community, with calls for Justice Varma’s resignation and criticism of the decision to only transfer him. The matter was also discussed in the Rajya Sabha.
Justice Varma, who presides over a division bench handling cases related to sales tax, GST, and company appeals, did not hold court on Friday, as reported by his court master.
To address the circulating misinformation, the Supreme Court issued a statement clarifying that an in-house inquiry was initiated by Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya of the Delhi High Court. The apex court collegium convened to discuss the incident and Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna awaited the report from Justice Upadhyaya.
Upon receiving the information, Justice Upadhyaya began the inquiry process to gather evidence and information. The report will undergo further review for necessary action, as stated in the official statement.
The Supreme Court announced that the proposal to transfer Justice Varma was reviewed by the Supreme Court collegium, which includes the Chief Justice of India and the four most senior judges, on March 20. Subsequently, letters were sent to the consultee judges of the Supreme Court, the chief justices of the relevant high courts, and Justice Varma. Responses received will be carefully considered, and the collegium will then make a decision.
Statement of Supreme Court on issue of Justice Yashwant Varma of Delhi High Court.
— ANI (@ANI) March 21, 2025
"There is misinformation and rumours being spread with regard to the incident at the residence of Mr. Justice Yashwant Varma…The proposal for transfer of Mr. Justice Yashwant Varma, who is the… pic.twitter.com/kewOwuarYw
During a session presided over by Justice Upadhyaya, he expressed shock at the matter. The Chief Justice’s reaction was prompted by senior lawyer Arun Bhardwaj, who mentioned that he and many other advocates were deeply affected by the incident and urged the Chief Justice to take administrative action. Justice Upadhyaya acknowledged the concern, stating, “We are conscious of the situation.” The Allahabad High Court Bar Association opposed Justice Varma’s transfer, stating that the court should not be treated as a “trash bin.”
The Bar Association resolution, signed by President and senior advocate Anil Tiwari, alleged that unaccounted money amounting to Rs 15 crore was found in the judge’s house. In the Rajya Sabha, Chairperson Jagdeep Dhankhar promised to facilitate a structured discussion on the issue. Congress MP Jairam Ramesh raised concerns about judicial accountability and reminded the Chair of a pending notice regarding the impeachment of a judge from the Allahabad High Court.
#WATCH | Prayagraj, UP: On SC Collegium recommending transfer of Justice Yashwant Varma of Delhi HC to his parent High Court in Allahabad after an adverse report against him, Anil Tiwari, President, Allahabad High Court Bar Association says "…If Rs 15 lakhs are found at the… pic.twitter.com/wTE1NsymsT
— ANI (@ANI) March 21, 2025
While the Congress emphasized the importance of uncovering the source of the money to maintain public trust in the judiciary, the BJP took a cautious approach, refraining from commenting on court matters and noting that the Chief Justice of India was already addressing the issue.
The incident sparked strong reactions from legal experts who questioned the collegium and called for Justice Varma’s resignation.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh deemed the matter very serious and suggested that the judge should step down. On the other hand, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi proposed that the apex court should conduct an in-house inquiry to gather all the facts, giving the judge an opportunity to present his side.
#WATCH | Delhi | On SC Collegium recommending transfer of Justice Yashwant Varma of Delhi HC to his parent High Court in Allahabad after an adverse report against him, Former President of Supreme Court Bar Association, Vikas Singh says,"It is a very serious matter because people… pic.twitter.com/xR0BjgHT37
— ANI (@ANI) March 21, 2025
Senior advocate Indira Jaising emphasized the importance of the Supreme Court collegium making a full, free, and frank disclosure of the facts. She found it surprising that information about the alleged incident on March 14 only surfaced on March 21.
According to the Delhi High Court website, Justice Varma became an advocate on August 8, 1992. He was appointed as an additional judge of the Allahabad High Court on October 13, 2014, and took oath as a permanent judge on February 1, 2016.
The Supreme Court has an established in-house inquiry mechanism to address allegations against judges of the Constitutional courts. The process involves the Chief Justice of India conducting a preliminary inquiry and forming a committee of three Supreme Court judges to investigate the matter, allowing the judge in question to respond.
Based on the panel’s report, further action may be taken. It is important to note that a judge of a constitutional court can only be removed from office through an impeachment motion passed by Parliament. In India’s history, no judge has been impeached, as some resigned before the completion of impeachment proceedings.
