New Delhi: A three-member inquiry committee constituted by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla has found all three charges against Justice Yashwant Varma “proved” in connection with the discovery of burnt currency at his official residence, stating that his explanations failed to adequately account for the presence, source or ownership of the cash.
The committee’s findings were tabled in both Houses of Parliament on Wednesday. The report said Justice Varma’s response did not meet the standards of “candour, transparency and institutional responsibility” expected from a judge of the higher judiciary in circumstances involving such serious allegations.
The inquiry committee was headed by Supreme Court judge Justice Aravind Kumar. Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and senior advocate of the Karnataka High Court B.V. Acharya were the other members.
According to the report, Justice Varma failed to provide a satisfactory explanation concerning the cash found in the storeroom of his official residence. The committee described his explanations as “evasive and unsatisfactory” when assessed against statements from independent official witnesses and other corroborative material gathered during the inquiry.
“The Committee therefore records its final findings that Articles of charges I, II and III are proved,” the panel stated in its consolidated findings.
The inquiry also raised concerns about the manner in which evidence at the site was handled. The committee found that material evidence had not been properly secured or preserved and that the evidentiary condition of the storeroom had been disturbed before the premises were lawfully sealed and inspected.
The case dates back to the night of March 14, 2025, when a fire broke out at the official residence of Justice Varma, who was then serving as a judge of the Delhi High Court. Firefighters responding to the incident allegedly discovered a large quantity of burnt currency in a storeroom at the residence. The discovery subsequently triggered serious questions about the circumstances surrounding the cash and its alleged connection with the judge.
Following the allegations, nearly 200 Members of Parliament moved a motion seeking Justice Varma’s removal from office. The subsequent inquiry was conducted under the Judges (Inquiry) Act.
The committee’s report, submitted in two volumes, contains oral and documentary evidence collected during the proceedings. The panel had submitted its findings to Speaker Om Birla in May, with the report now being formally placed before Parliament.
Justice Varma has since resigned from judicial office. However, the resignation has not yet been notified by the Union Law Ministry. His name also continues to appear on the Allahabad High Court’s website.
The legal and constitutional consequences of his resignation remain significant. If the resignation is treated as accepted, the removal proceedings initiated against him could effectively become infructuous. Nevertheless, the inquiry committee’s findings provide a formal record of its conclusions on the allegations and the evidence examined during the statutory process.
The development comes amid continuing scrutiny of judicial accountability and the mechanisms available to address allegations of misconduct involving judges of the higher judiciary.
