Cash at judge’s residence: CJI to examine ‘in-house’ enquiry report (Lead)

New Delhi, March 21 (IANS) Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna will receive on Friday the report prepared by the Delhi High Court’s Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya after a large amount of unaccounted cash was reportedly discovered at the residence of a high court judge in the national capital.

“The Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, who had commenced his enquiry prior to the Collegium meeting on 20th March 2025, will be submitting his report to the Chief Justice of India today i.e. on 21st March 2025. The report will be examined and processed for further and necessary action,” said a statement released by the Supreme Court.

As per media reports, a huge amount of cash was found last week when a fire brigade had gone to Delhi HC’s Justice Yashwant Varma’s residence to douse a fire.

The apex court press statement clarified that the proposal for the transfer of Justice Varma, who is the second senior most judge in the Delhi High Court, to his parent High Court i.e. the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, where he will be the ninth in seniority, is “independent and separate from the In-house enquiry procedure”.

“The proposal was examined by the Collegium comprising of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and four senior-most Judges of the Supreme Court on 20th March 2025, and thereafter letters were written to the consultee Judges of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justices of the High Courts concerned, and Mr Justice Yashwant Varma. Responses received will be examined and, thereupon, the Collegium will pass a resolution,” the statement added.

“There is misinformation and rumours being spread with regard to the incident at the residence of Mr Justice Yashwant Varma,” the press statement said.

As per the “in-house procedure”, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is competent to receive complaints against the conduct of judges of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justices of the High Courts. Similarly, the Chief Justices of the High Courts are competent to receive complaints against the conduct of High Court judges.

The apex court Court, in its full Court meeting in May 1997 had adopted two resolutions. The first resolution “The Restatement of Values of Judicial Life” lays down certain judicial standards and principles to be observed and followed by the judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, and the second “in-house procedure” provides for taking suitable remedial action against judges who do not follow universally accepted values of judicial life including those included in the Restatement.

As per the SC judgment in the Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India case, it has been held that the report of a committee constituted as a part of the “in-house procedure” is not liable to be made public.

The existing Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) provided that the proposal for transfer of HC judges is initiated by the CJI in consultation with four senior-most puisne judges of the Supreme Court, commonly known as Collegium. The MoP further provides that the CJI is also expected to take into account the views of the Chief Justice of the High Court from which the judge is to be transferred, as also the Chief Justice of the High Court to which the transfer is to be effected, besides taking into account the views of one or more Supreme Court judges who are in a position to offer views.

Born in January 1969, Justice Varma obtained a law degree from Rewa University and practised mainly on the civil side handling varied nature of matters relating to constitutional, industrial disputes, corporate, taxation, environment, and allied branches of law. He served as Chief Standing Counsel for the State of UP from 2012 till August 2013, when he was designated as ‘senior advocate’ by the Allahabad High Court. Justice Varma was elevated as an Additional Judge in October 2014 and was transferred to the Delhi High Court in October 2021.

At the Delhi High Court, Justice Varma is currently the second seniormost judge dealing with writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of any law, statutory rule, regulation or notification pertaining to municipal tax. As per the latest roster, Justice Varma-led division bench, which also comprised Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, dealt with sales tax cases and GST cases, Letters Patent Appeals, regular First Appeals (Original Side), Company Appeals, matters to be heard by Commercial Appellate Division, etc.

–IANS

pds/vd