Cash at judge’s house: CJI Khanna recommends removal of Justice Yashwant Varma

Days after a three-judge inquiry panel indicted Allahabad High Court's Justice Yashwant Varma for recovery of unaccounted cash during a fire incident at his residence here on March 14 — when he was a judge of the Delhi High Court, CJI Sanjiv Khanna is reliably learnt to have recommended his removal to the government.

"Chief Justice of India, in terms of the in-house procedure, has written to President of India and the Prime Minister of India enclosing therewith a copy of the three-member committee report dated May 3 along with the letter/response dated May 6 received from Justice Yashwant Varma," a Supreme Court statement read.

In its report submitted to the CJI on May 4, the three-member committee comprising Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, Himachal Pradesh High Court Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Anu Sivaraman of the Karnataka High Court found clear evidence to confirm recovery of a huge stash of cash in the storeroom of Justice Varma's official residence in New Delhi at the time of the fire incident, sources said.

After the indictment, the CJI – who is due to retire on May 13 — had sought Justice Varma’s response to the panel’s report and had also advised him to step down. As Justice Varma ignored the CJI’s advice, Justice Khanna sent the inquiry panel report to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi recommending his removal, sources said.

Based on the March 24 recommendation of the Supreme Court Collegium, Justice Varma was on March 28 transferred from the Delhi High Court to his parent high court ie the Allahabad High Court where he has not been assigned any judicial work “for the time being”.

The three-judge panel submitted its report after analysing the evidence and recording the statements of over 50 people, including Delhi Police Commissioner Sanjay Arora and Delhi Fire Service chief who were among the first responders to the fire incident at Justice Varma's official residence here at around 11.35 pm on March 14.

The panel was set up by CJI Khanna after receiving an initial report from Delhi High Court Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya on the allegations against Justice Varma. Justice Varma had denied the allegations.

In an unprecedented move, the Supreme Court had on March 22 released the initial probe report submitted by Delhi High Court Chief along with Justice Varma’s response unequivocally denying the allegations as “totally preposterous.”

The top court had also uploaded on its website the documents, including photos and video substantiating the allegations of the discovery of unaccounted currencies at Justice Varma’s residence. The videos and photographs were taken by the Delhi Police during the firefighting operation on March 14. However, the latest report of the three-member inquiry panel has not been made public.

According to Article 124(4), a Supreme Court judge can be removed from his office on the ground of proved misbehavior or incapacity by an order of the President only after an address (motion for removal) by Parliament has been passed by a special majority of each House of Parliament and presented to her in the same session for such removal. Article 217(1) makes it applicable to removal of high court judges.

However, the procedure for removal of SC/HC judges is regulated by the Judges Enquiry Act, 1968. It requires a motion for removal to be signed by 50 members of Rajya Sabha or 100 members of Lok Sabha.

The Rajya Sabha Chairman or the Lok Sabha Speaker – as the case may be — can either admit or refuse to admit the motion for removal of a judge. If the motion is admitted, a three-member committee comprising a Supreme Court judge, a high court chief justice and a distinguished jurist will be constituted to probe the complaint and determine whether a case is made out to initiate the process for removal of the judge in question.

If the committee finds the judge in question guilty of “misbehaviour or incapacity”, the motion for his removal will be taken up for consideration and debated in each House of Parliament.

To remove a judge from office, the motion has to be adopted by each House by a special majority (i.e. a majority of the total membership of that House and a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting). After the motion is adopted in both the Houses, it’s sent in the same session to the president, who will issue an order for removal of the judge.