‘Evasive, incomplete, misleading’: What Parliament panel said on Justice Yashwant Varma cash-at-home case

Theindiapostdaily.com – A Parliament-appointed inquiry panel has found all three charges against Justice Yashwant Varma proved in connection with the "recovery of cash from a storeroom" at his official residence, according to its report tabled in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on Wednesday, 12 August.The panel said a substantial quantity of ₹500 notes was found in the storeroom and that Justice Varma, who resigned as a High Court Judge in April this year, could not provide a satisfactory explanation for the source, ownership, or presence of the cash.The panel was headed by Supreme Court judge Justice Aravind Kumar and included former Bombay High Court Chief Justice and now Supreme Court Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Senior Advocate BV Acharya.The report also examined what happened to the storeroom after the cash was discovered. It said the room was disturbed before it could be properly sealed and inspected, affecting the preservation of evidence.The Secretaries General of the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha laid the report in their respective Houses.The report is in two volumes, along with oral and documentary evidence recorded during the course of the investigation. The three-member probe panel had submitted its findings to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla in May.What did the panel say?The panel noted that Justice Varma initially denied the allegations but later suggested different possibilities, including that the cash may have been planted or that there could have been a conspiracy involving others.However, the panel said no evidence was produced in support of these claims.It also noted that relevant staff members were not examined as defence witnesses and that no FIR or formal complaint was lodged alleging that the cash had been planted or that evidence had been tampered with.The panel said these circumstances supported drawing an adverse inference while considering Justice Varma's defence.What happened on 14 March?A fire broke out in the official residence of Justice Varma on the night of March 14, 2025.

Firefighters called to put out the blaze allegedly discovered massive amounts of burnt currency in a storeroom.Justice Varma has since resigned, and removal proceedings against him have virtually become infructuous. His resignation, however, has not yet been notified by the law ministry. He was a judge of the Delhi High Court and repatriated to his parent court, the Allahabad High Court, following the controversy.An in-house committee constituted by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna concluded that Justice Varma had "active or tacit control" over the specific storeroom where the cash was hidden.In July 2025, over 200 MPs signed a motion to impeach (removal by Parliament) the judge.

In August last year, Birla constituted the three-member Judges Inquiry Committee to look into the charges.‘Explanation was incomplete and misleading’The panel concluded that his explanation was evasive, incomplete and misleading in effect and held that the conduct did not meet the standards of transparency, candour and institutional responsibility expected of a constitutional court judge.The committee said the charges are threefold – firstly, discovery and possession of unexplained Indian currency notes within official premises; secondly, failure to preserve and causing interference with material evidence; and thirdly, furnishing evasive and misleading explanations.The report follows a detailed inquiry in which the panel examined documentary and electronic material and recorded evidence from witnesses. The accompanying proceedings show that Justice Varma was given an opportunity to respond to the charges and present his defence."The statement of grounds accompanying the charges records the occurrence of fire, discovery of cash, location of the storeroom within the Government-allotted residence, the alleged conduct after the fire, and the explanation offered by the Judge," the inquiry report said."Article I is proved. Substantial unexplained ₹500 denomination currency notes were found in the storeroom situated within the official residential premises at 30, Tughlaq Crescent, New Delhi.

The Judge failed to furnish a satisfactory explanation regarding the presence, source or ownership thereof," it said."Article II is proved that material evidence was not secured or preserved; the evidentiary condition of the storeroom was disturbed before lawful sealing and inspection; and the later non-availability of the currency notes remains unexplained. The finding rests on failure to preserve, acquiescence in disturbance through the establishment attached to the premises, and resulting loss of material evidence, and not upon proof of personal physical removal by the Judge. Article III is proved," it added.The committee said that the explanation furnished by the Judge, particularly the reply dated March 22, 2025 and the subsequent stand taken, did not "exhibit the candour, transparency and institutional responsibility expected in the circumstances.

It remained evasive and unsatisfactory when tested against the evidence of independent official witnesses and corroborative material".Who is Justice Yashwant Varma?Justice Yashwant Varma was Born on 6 January 1969 in Allahabad. He pursued the B.Com [Honours] degree course at Hansraj College, Delhi University. He was awarded the LLB degree by Rewa University, Madhya Pradesh, and thereafter enrolled as an Advocate on August 8, 1992.He was elevated as Additional Judge at the Allahabad High Court on October 13, 2014, took oath as the Permanent Judge of that court on February 1, 2016 and transferred to Delhi High Court on October 11, 2021.As an advocate at the Allahabad High Court, he had a varied practice handling matters relating to constitutional, labour and industrial legislations, corporate laws, taxation and allied branches of law.He was also the Special Counsel for the Allahabad High Court from 2006 till elevation, as per his profile on the Delhi High Court's website.Justice Yashwant Varma held the office of the Chief Standing Counsel for Uttar Pradesh from 2012 till August 2013 when was designated as a Senior Advocate by the Court.

(With agency inputs)