Union Minister Kiren Rijiju on Sunday confirmed that the Central government will introduce an impeachment motion against Justice Yashwant Varma of the Allahabad High Court during the upcoming session of Parliament. Speaking to reporters, Rijiju stated that more than 100 Members of Parliament have already signed the motion supporting the judge’s removal.
“The government will bring an impeachment motion against Justice Yashwant Varma in this session. MPs have signed the motion for impeachment,” Rijiju said. When asked for a specific timeline, he replied, “Timeline can’t be told right now, we will decide and tell you later.”
The case against Justice Varma dates back to March 2025, when a fire broke out at his official residence in Delhi. Following the blaze, a substantial amount of cash—either completely or partially burnt—was allegedly found at the scene. The incident quickly became a flashpoint for national controversy, fueling demands for a full-fledged investigation and raising serious questions about judicial accountability.
At the time of the incident, Justice Varma was serving on the bench of the Delhi High Court. He has categorically denied any involvement with the recovered cash and has repeatedly claimed that he is being targeted as part of a conspiracy. According to him, he has no knowledge of the money, which he says was planted to malign his reputation.
Judicial transfer and internal investigation
Justice Varma was returned to the Allahabad High Court after the controversy, and he hasn't been given any judicial duties there since. He hasn't decided to retire on his own or quit his job. Instead, he continues to maintain that the inquiry against him is unjust and seriously flawed.
Most recently, Justice Varma petitioned the Supreme Court to reverse an internal investigation report that charged him with judicial misconduct in connection with the alleged cash recovery. In his petition, he challenged the validity and fairness of the investigation, alleging that the procedures were unconstitutional, procedurally irregular, and a violation of his fundamental rights.
Also Read: SC panel recommends impeachment of Justice Varma over cash haul
Important claims in the petition
The national media's access to Justice Varma's plea presents a number of issues. He stated that he and his spouse were on vacation in Madhya Pradesh when the fire broke out. His daughter and mother were the only ones present at the Delhi residence at the time of the incident.
The petition also stated that the Delhi Fire Services and the Police did not seize any cash from the site, nor did they prepare a panchnama to formally document any such recovery. This lack of documentation, according to the judge, undermines the credibility of the allegations.
Furthermore, Justice Varma accused the in-house committee of violating the principles of natural justice. He stated that he was never granted a personal hearing by the Chief Justice of India and was not allowed to participate in the evidence-gathering process. He was also denied the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses or review critical materials, including CCTV footage from the scene.
The judge further contended that the inquiry committee failed to present any clear, specific, or tentative charges. The report, he said, did not address vital questions such as who placed the cash, its ownership, quantity, or source, and the actual cause of the fire. He claimed that rather than being supported by hard evidence, the conclusions were based on conjecture.
Eyewitness testimonies and media leaks
Concerns were also voiced by Justice Varma regarding how the internal report was leaked to the media before he had an opportunity to comment. He claimed that his dignity and reputation were irreparably harmed by this.
Separately, a Supreme Court-appointed committee has revealed for the first time the identities of ten witnesses who claimed to have seen substantial sums of money in Justice Varma's official residence's storeroom. The case continues to spark discussion in legal and political circles as the government proceeds with the impeachment process, bringing up more general issues regarding institutional transparency, procedural justice, and judicial integrity.
Also Read: Judge in cash row moves SC against panel report, impeachment
Follow us
