How Ex-Judge Yashwant Varma's Own Bar Let Him Down In the Inquiry Against Him
New Delhi: The inquiry committee constituted under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, has indicted Justice Yashwant Varma in the cash-in-outhouse case. In its report placed before Lok Sabha today, the committee has held Justice Varma – who resigned in April – guilty on all the three charges recorded against him, including “discovery and possession of unexplained Indian currency notes”.
Ironically, it is his own bar that turned against Varma in the case.
Justice Varma had contended in his defence that the storeroom in which piles of charred Rs 500 notes were found in his outhouse was not exclusively accessed by him but was also accessed by his staff, security personnel and even Central Public Works Department (CPWD) members.
Justice Varma had told the committee, “[The] storeroom was detached from the main living area, was near the staff/security quarters, was used for storage of old household articles, and was accessible to staff, CPWD
personnel and others.”
The inquiry committee presided over by Supreme Court Judge Arvind Kumar, has rejected this argument, saying, “The said defence also requires to be tested against the judge's own statement that a liquor cabinet was kept in the storeroom and that the said liquor cabinet used to remain locked. A locked cabinet containing personal articles is not ordinarily maintained in a space which is wholly unregulated, wholly outside the knowledge of the occupant, or wholly beyond his effective control.”
The inquiry committee states that it does not follow from this circumstance that the currency notes belonged to the judge. Nor does it treat the existence of a locked liquor cabinet as proof of possession of currency notes. However, the committee says in its report, “Its relevance is narrower but significant. It answers the defence that the room was outside the judge's knowledge, use or effective control."
The committee holds that if the room was "sufficiently connected" with the judge's establishment to keep a locked personal cabinet in it, in that case, the plea that the judge had no effective control over the room "cannot be accepted in the broad manner in which it is advanced".
Rejecting the former judge's argument, the committee holds that, “At the highest, it shows that others may also have had access to the room. The other persons, if any, could have accessed the storeroom only under his command. It does not also show that the judge had no access, no use, no knowledge of the room, or no institutional responsibility over it. The defence based on lack of control is accordingly rejected.”
A fire broke out in the official residence of Justice Varma, a judge of Delhi high court on the intervening night of March 14 and March 15, 2025 that led to the discovery of large quantities of Rs 500 currency notes, mostly charred.
Based on the report of the Chief Justice of India, parliament constituted an inquiry committee comprising Justice Arvind Kumar, Justice Shree Chandrashekar and Senior Advocate B.V. Acharya to probe the allegations of the discovery of these notes at the official residence of a judge.
During the proceedings of the inquiry committee, Justice Varma was transferred to the Allahabad high court and subsequently sent his resignation to the President of India.
This article went live on August twelfth, two thousand twenty six, at eleven minutes past five in the evening.The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
