New Delhi: A fire at the Delhi home of Justice Yashwant Varma, a member of the High Courtโs tax bench, has uncovered a high-stakes controversy after emergency responders discovered a significant stash of unaccounted cash. The incident has triggered swift action from the Supreme Court Collegium, which ordered Justice Varmaโs immediate transfer to the Allahabad High Courtโa move critics argue may only scratch the surface of the scandal.
Incident Details
The blaze broke out while Justice Varma was away from the capital. Family members alerted emergency services, and during their response, firefighters and police stumbled upon the unexplained cash hoard in one of the residenceโs rooms. Authorities documented the discovery formally, prompting senior officials to escalate the matter to Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna.
Collegiumโs Swift Response
In an urgent meeting, the Supreme Court Collegium, led by CJI Khanna, unanimously decided to relocate Justice Varma to his former post at the Allahabad High Court, where he served prior to his 2021 Delhi appointment. However, the decision reportedly faced internal dissent, with some members pushing for harsher measures, including demands for his resignation or the initiation of an in-house inquiry. Critics argue a mere transfer fails to address potential ethical breaches, emphasizing the need for accountability to preserve judicial credibility.
Mounting Pressure for Accountability
The controversy has intensified debates about oversight within the judiciary. While transfers are routine, the circumstances here have fueled calls for stricter protocols. Under the Supreme Courtโs 1999 in-house procedure, CJI Khanna could demand a formal explanation from Justice Varma. If unsatisfied, a probe panelโcomprising a Supreme Court judge and two High Court chief justicesโmay be convened to investigate further, potentially paving the way for parliamentary removal proceedings.
Broader Implications
The rare exposure of alleged misconduct at a senior judgeโs residence has rattled Indiaโs legal community, amplifying concerns about eroding public trust. Legal experts warn that the judiciaryโs response will set a critical precedent, as delayed or inadequate action risks deepening skepticism toward institutional transparency. With the spotlight on due process, the Collegium faces mounting pressure to balance procedural fairness with decisive accountabilityโa test of its commitment to upholding the judiciaryโs sanctity in the eyes of the public.
