New Delhi, Jul 28 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Monday grilled Allahabad High Court’s Justice Yashwant Varma for challenging findings of an in-house inquiry panel report against him over the incident of cash discovery from his official residence and asked how could he question it after participating in the process.
The in-house inquiry panel report indicted Justice Varma over the discovery of huge cache of burnt cash from his official residence during his tenure as a Delhi High Court judge.
A bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and A G Masih asked Justice Varma why did he wait for the inquiry to be completed and the report be released.
“Why did you appear before the inquiry committee? Did you come to the court that the video be removed? Why did you wait for the inquiry to be completed and the report be released? Did you take a chance of a favourable order there first (sic),” a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A G Masih asked senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who was representing Justice Varma.
Sibal said the appearance before the committee couldn’t be held against him.
“I appeared because I thought committee would find out who the cash belongs to,” Sibal said.
The top court was hearing a plea Justice Varma’s plea seeking invalidation of a report by an in-house inquiry panel which found him guilty of misconduct in the cash discovery matter.
The plea does not reveal Justice Varma’s identity and is titled, “XXX v. The Union of India”.
The top court further quizzed him over the parties he had made in his plea and said he should have filed the in-house inquiry report with his plea.
“This petition should not have been filed like this. Please see the party is registrar general here and not secretary general. The first party is Supreme Court as your grievance is against the process mentioned. We don’t expect the senior counsel to go through the causetitle,” the bench said.
Sibal submitted there was a process under Article 124 ( Establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court), and a judge couldn’t be a subject matter of public debate.
“The release of video on SC website, public furore, media accusations against judges are prohibited as per constitutional scheme,” Sibal added.
He submitted the inquiry committee report couldn’t form the basis for the impeachment motion.
The bench, however, refused to look at anything not a part of the record.
“You need to satisfy us based on the petition and the four corners of law. Whom did CJI sent this letter to? President is the one who appoints the judge. Prime Minister because President acts on aid and advice of council of ministers. So sending these letters, how does that mean it is for the house to impeach?” the top court asked.
The top court asked Sibal to come with one page of bullet points and correct the memo of parties.
The matter was posted for July 30.
Justice Varma has sought quashing of the May 8 recommendation by then chief justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, urging Parliament to initiate impeachment proceedings against him.
His plea said the inquiry “reversed the burden of proof”, requiring him to investigate and disprove the charges levelled against him.
Alleging that the panel’s findings were based on a preconceived narrative, Justice Varma said the inquiry timelines were driven solely by the urge to conclude proceedings swiftly, even at the expense of “procedural fairness”.
The petition contended that the inquiry panel drew adverse findings without affording him a full and fair hearing.
A report of the inquiry panel probing the incident had said Justice Varma and his family members had covert or active control over the store room where a huge cache of half-burnt cash was found following a fire incident, proving his misconduct which is serious enough to seek his removal.
The three-judge panel headed by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of the Punjab and Haryana High Court conducted the inquiry for 10 days, examined 55 witnesses and visited the scene of the accidental fire that started at around 11.35 pm on March 14 at the official residence of Justice Varma, then a sitting judge of the Delhi High Court and now in the Allahabad High Court.
Acting on the report, then CJI Khanna wrote to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi recommending the judge’s impeachment. PTI PKS AMK AMK
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.