Supreme Court Declines Urgent Hearing on Plea Seeking FIR in Delhi HC Judge Cash Scandal
"Supreme Court declines urgent hearing on plea demanding an FIR and probe into the alleged discovery of burnt cash at Delhi HC Judge Yashwant Varma’s residence. Read more on the case details and legal developments."
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India has refused to grant an urgent hearing on a plea demanding the registration of an FIR and an investigation by the Delhi Police into allegations concerning a huge pile of burnt cash discovered at the official residence of Justice Yashwant Varma, a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court.
Table of Contents
SC Denies Urgent Listing of FIR Plea
During the hearing on Wednesday, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna dismissed the request for an expedited hearing and advised advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara, who appeared as the petitioner in person, not to make public statements about the matter.
“Sorry, Mr. Nedumpara,” CJI Khanna stated, adding that the Supreme Court registry would list the petition in due course.
Allegations and Delay in FIR Registration
The petition highlights serious concerns over the lack of an immediate FIR when unaccounted cash was allegedly found at Justice Varma’s residence on March 14. According to reports, the discovery occurred when the fire department responded to a blaze at his residence. The plea questions the delay in publicly disclosing the details and suspects a cover-up attempt.
Key concerns raised in the petition include:
- Why was no FIR registered immediately on March 14?
- Why was the unaccounted cash not seized by authorities?
- Why did it take nearly a week for the matter to become public?
- Why did Justice Varma himself not report the incident to the police if he was unaware of the cash?
The plea argues that the case presents prima facie evidence of black money linked to corruption within the judiciary. It further contends that even if Justice Varma denies ownership of the money, an investigation is necessary to uncover any conspiracy or attempt to implicate him falsely.
Challenge to SC Collegium’s Three-Member Inquiry Panel
The petition also challenges the Supreme Court Collegium’s decision to constitute a three-member panel to investigate the case. The plea argues that this committee has no legal authority to probe what it claims are cognizable offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Instead, the petitioner insists that the Delhi Police should have taken immediate action under statutory law.
- Also Read | Supreme Court Orders Uttarakhand Government to Pay Rs 1 Crore Compensation to Slain Doctor’s Family
Corruption in Judiciary a Constitutional Concern
The petitioners further argue that judicial corruption undermines the fundamental rights of citizens under Part III of the Constitution. They claim they have unquestionable locus standi (the legal right to file a petition) to bring the issue directly before the Supreme Court.
The plea also challenges a past judgment from the K. Veeraswami vs. Union of India case, which requires consultation with the Chief Justice of India before filing criminal cases against judges. The petition contends that this precedent is unconstitutional as it prevents law enforcement agencies from fulfilling their duty.
Supreme Court Inquiry Committee Begins Investigation
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court-appointed three-member committee officially began its probe on Tuesday, March 25. The panel, consisting of:
- Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the Punjab & Haryana High Court,
- Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court,
- Justice Anu Sivaraman, Judge of the Karnataka High Court,
visited Justice Yashwant Varma’s official residence and reportedly spent over half an hour investigating the scene where the burnt cash was allegedly found.
Judicial Work Withdrawn from Justice Varma
Following the controversy, Delhi High Court Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya withdrew all judicial responsibilities from Justice Varma on Monday, March 24, pending further inquiry.
SC Collegium Recommends Repatriation of Justice Varma
In a separate development, the Supreme Court Collegium, led by CJI Khanna, has recommended that Justice Yashwant Varma be repatriated to the Allahabad High Court, where he previously served before his transfer to Delhi HC.
The official statement from the SC Collegium, uploaded on the Supreme Court website, reads: “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.”
Public Perception and Legal Implications
The alleged discovery of burnt cash at a judge’s residence has sent shockwaves through the legal fraternity and raised serious concerns about transparency and accountability within the judiciary. The plea warns that the failure to register an FIR could further damage public confidence in the legal system and set a dangerous precedent for future judicial corruption cases.
What Happens Next?
With the Supreme Court declining an urgent hearing, the case will be listed in due course. Meanwhile, the SC inquiry panel will continue its probe, and further developments are expected in the coming weeks.
Stay tuned for more updates as the case unfolds.
