New Delhi, May 19: The inquiry committee examining allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma has submitted its report to Om Birla following an investigation into the alleged discovery of unaccounted cash at the judge’s official residence in Delhi.
The Lok Sabha Secretariat confirmed on Monday that the report was submitted under the provisions of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, and would be placed before both Houses of Parliament in due course. The upcoming Monsoon Session, generally held in the third week of July, is expected to be the next opportunity for the report to be tabled.
The three-member inquiry panel was constituted by Speaker Om Birla on August 12, 2025, after serious allegations surfaced against Justice Varma. The controversy began following a fire incident at his official residence in Delhi on the night of March 14, 2025. During firefighting operations, officials allegedly recovered a large quantity of burnt currency notes from a storeroom inside the bungalow.
At the time of the incident, Justice Varma was serving as a judge of the Delhi High Court. He was later transferred back to his parent court, the Allahabad High Court.
An internal committee set up by former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna reportedly concluded that Justice Varma had “active or tacit control” over the storeroom where the alleged cash was found.
Following the findings, more than 200 Members of Parliament signed a motion in July 2025 seeking the judge’s removal. Under Indian law, judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, along with the Chief Election Commissioner, can only be removed through a parliamentary process governed by the Judges (Inquiry) Act.
However, before the proceedings could move further, Justice Varma resigned from his post as a judge of the Allahabad High Court. Legal experts stated that the resignation effectively rendered the removal proceedings infructuous because, according to Supreme Court rulings, a judge is considered to have resigned once the resignation is submitted to the President and made public.
Experts familiar with judicial appointment and removal procedures explained that a judge’s resignation does not require formal approval by the President, although the Department of Justice later issues an official notification after procedural acceptance.
Despite the resignation, Justice Varma’s name reportedly still appears on the official list of sitting judges of the Allahabad High Court. Legal observers, however, maintain that under judicial precedent, he is now regarded as a private citizen and therefore cannot be removed by Parliament.
Justice Varma was otherwise scheduled to retire on January 5, 2031, upon attaining the retirement age of 62 years.
Sources familiar with the matter said the inquiry panel continued its work despite the resignation because the investigation had commenced while Justice Varma was still serving as a sitting judge. Experts noted that the committee’s examination of charges is treated as a judicial function independent of subsequent developments.
Attention will now shift to Parliament, where lawmakers are expected to decide the future course of action once the report is officially tabled during the Monsoon Session.