Varma is facing a judicial probe after a fire at the judge’s official residence in Delhi allegedly led to the recovery of a huge pile of cash by the firefighters, triggering a huge controversyread moreIndia’s Supreme Court Collegium on Monday (March 24) repatriated embattled Delhi High Court Justice Yashwant Varma back to his parent Allahabad High Court. Varma is facing a judicial probe after a fire at the judge’s official residence in Delhi allegedly led to the recovery of a huge pile of cash by the firefighters, triggering a huge controversy.This is the second meeting held by Supreme Court Collegium on this matter. The first meeting was held on March 20 when it was initially proposed to send Varma to Allahabad High Court.Advertisement“The Supreme Court Collegium in its meetings held on 20th and 24th March 2025 has recommended repatriation of Mr. Justice Yashwant Varma, Judge, High Court of Delhi, to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,” said a statement issued by the Collegium.Justice Varma de-rostered from Delhi HCMeanwhile, it was reported on Monday that Varma’s name has been removed from Delhi High Court registry, essentially withdrawing judicial work assigned to him.According to the high court’s new roster, Varma’s cases will now be handled by Justice Subramanium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar.India’s chief justice launches probeEarlier on March 21, the Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, launched an in-house probe into the matter. Later, on March 22, he formed a three-member panel to investigate the case.The Supreme Court has also published a report prepared by Delhi High Court chief justice regarding the case, along with Justice Varma’s response to the allegations.Justice Varma has refuted the allegations, labelling them as an attempt to malign his reputation. He has also claimed none of his family members or staff had placed the cash inside the building.“I state unequivocally that no cash was ever placed in that storeroom either by me or any of my family members and strongly denounce the suggestion that the alleged cash belonged to us. The very idea or suggestion that this cash was kept or stored by us is totally preposterous. The suggestion that one would store cash in an open, freely accessible and commonly used storeroom near the staff quarters or in an outhouse verges on the incredible and incredulous,” he said in his response.Union Law minister and vice president reactVice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Monday said he welcomed the Supreme Court’s intervention in this case and asked parliament to wait for the panel to submit its findings.Dhankhar also met with Leader of the Upper House (Rajya Sabha) J P Nadda and Leader of the Opposition Mallikarjun Kharge to discuss the matter.“It is for the first time since Independence that a Chief Justice has in a transparent, accountable manner put all material available to him in the public domain and shared it without keeping anything with the Court. This is a step in the right direction. Constitution of a committee by the Chief Justice of India and the alertness he has reflected is also a factor that needs consideration. Institutions like the Judiciary and Legislature serve their purpose best when their in-House mechanism is effective, fast and upholding public trust,” said VP Dhankhar in a statement.AdvertisementUnion Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal said he would like to wait for the committee’s report before making any statement.“This case is with the Supreme Court. It has formed a three-member committee including two High Court Chief Justices and one High Court Judge. Let the committee report come. Then we will talk about this…,” Meghwal was quoted as saying by news agency ANI.More from India
Cash-at-home row: Embattled justice Varma transferred to Allahabad HC, de-rostered from Delhi High Court
Green day on D-Street: Bulls boost Sensex up over 1,000 points, Nifty 50 ends day above 23,600
Alliance Air flight misses touchdown zone at Shimla airport, major accident averted
IAEA chief lauds India’s cancer care, wants country in NSGTagsDelhi High CourtIndiaSupreme CourtEnd of Article
Original source:
