Allahabad High Court Judge Resigns Amid Controversy Over Burnt Cash Inquiry
Justice Yashwant Varma of the Allahabad High Court has submitted his resignation to President Droupadi Murmu, but his departure is marked by strong criticism of the judicial inquiry process. In a letter addressed to Supreme Court Justice Aravind Kumar, who heads the judges' inquiry committee, Justice Varma faulted the committee's procedures for testing the veracity of charges related to the discovery of a large amount of unaccounted burnt cash at his official residence.
Allegations of Procedural Flaws and Unfair Burden
Justice Varma expressed frustration with the committee's decision to proceed without what he termed "cogent evidence" against him. He argued that this approach left him with no choice but to withdraw, as continued participation would legitimize a process that "calls upon me to answer the unanswerable - where did the money come from." He emphasized that he had simultaneously communicated his resignation to the President of India.
The controversy stems from videos recorded by first responders—firemen and police—during a fire incident at his central Delhi residence on the night of March 14-15 last year. These videos, later uploaded to the Supreme Court website, played a crucial role in the inquiry. According to reports, the evidence presented by these responders was damning, and it became even more pointed during cross-examination by Justice Varma's lawyers, who graphically described the discovery of cash and the conduct of individuals present at the judge's house that night.
Background and Legal Challenges
Justice Varma was considered close to Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, who served as Chief Justice of India from November 2022 to November 2024. In March 2024, an Supreme Court bench led by Justice Chandrachud quashed a CBI FIR and an ECIR by the Enforcement Directorate against Justice Varma. These cases related to his role as a non-executive director of Simbhaoli Sugar Ltd in an alleged bank loan fraud case, prior to his appointment as a high court judge.
One of Justice Varma's main grievances was that the inquiry committee, constituted by then CJI Sanjiv Khanna, had shifted the onus of proving innocence onto him based on evidence gathered during the inquiry. He contended that the inquiry report should not serve as evidence or be relevant for any future proceedings. His challenge to the inquiry proceedings, its report, and the recommendation for initiating a removal motion was dismissed by an Supreme Court bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A.G. Masih on August 7 last year.
Defense and Criticisms of the Inquiry
In his defense, Justice Varma highlighted that the storeroom where the burnt cash was allegedly found and where videos were recorded was never seized by police. He further argued that since the room was accessible to all, it could not be his responsibility to monitor who kept what in the sprawling premises of an official bungalow, which includes residential quarters for house helps. He left it to posterity to judge "whether such an obligation can ever be discharged or be justifiably placed upon occupants of such premises."
Asserting that the allegations and innuendos against him lacked any basis or evidence, Justice Varma criticized the inquiry process as "unknown to the law of criminal trial." He stated, "The burden of proof has been effectively reversed without any foundational case being made out." Expressing profound disappointment, he noted that despite the serious nature of the proceedings—which could lead to the removal of a sitting high court judge—the committee did not intervene despite what he described as the "shocking manner" in which the proceedings unfolded.
This resignation underscores ongoing tensions within the judiciary regarding procedural fairness and the handling of sensitive inquiries involving high-ranking officials.
