In-House Panel Found Mismatches in Justice Varma’s Claims & Ground Evidence

The three judge in-house committee constituted by chief justice of india sanjiv khanna to inquire into serious allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma, the then sitting judge of Delhi High Court who was subsequently repatriated to Allahabad High Court is learnt to have found glaring loopholes in claims made by the judge. Reportedly, following a fire incident on March 14 at the official residence of Justice Varma, sacks of burnt currency were discovered.

Sources privy to the contents of the report told The Leaflet that the panel also found that not all sacks of money were burnt in the fire. However, there was no way for it to ascertain the exact amount of burnt, half-burnt and untouched currency note since the room had been thoroughly cleaned out the day after the incident.

The questionable role played by Justice Varma’s then Secretary, a staffer on the rolls of the Delhi High Court, has also been highlighted by the panel.

On March 22, CJI Khanna had set up the committee, comprising Chief Justice of the Punjab & Haryana High Court Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court G.S. Sandhawalia and judge of the Karnataka High Court Justice Anu Sivaraman to look into the allegations of cash recovery after the fire incident was brought to his notice. Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya of the Delhi High Court had recommended a “deeper probe” into the allegations against Justice Varma.

The questionable role played by Justice Varma’s then Secretary, a staffer on the rolls of the Delhi High Court, has also been highlighted by the panel.

Clear mismatch between findings of the probe panel and Justice Varma’s claims

According to sources privy to the report, which has now been forwarded to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi for appropriate action, including initiating steps for Justice Varma’s removal from service, the panel found that several of the claims made by the judge did not match evidence on the ground.

For example, the panel concluded that material, including burnt sacks of notes, was surreptitiously moved out of the room which was part of the outhouse, exactly a day after much of the money was blazed  in a mysterious fire. The panel is learnt to have concluded that this was akin to destruction of crucial evidence and was possibly done to ensure that evidence that could have linked the judge to the money was no longer available for any investigating team to probe.

“The panel has found that some unnamed person made several trips in private vehicles to clean the room and also move out the material, burnt and otherwise, from the scene of the incident. This led to a lot of unanswered questions,” a source said.

The panel recorded statements of several key witnesses, including court staff attached to the judge, the security personnel on guard duty at the residence and the police and fire department personnel who visited the residence after the incidence of fire was reported.

The panel was of the view that the judge’s court staff may have been involved in destruction of evidence a day after the incident. 

Contrary to Justice Varma’s claim, outhouse room was not accessible to all

Incidentally, while speculation was rife that the daughter-in-law of a former judge of the Delhi High Court, who has also since been transferred, was responsible for ferrying  the evidence out of the room, this was found to be factually incorrect. The judge’s daughter-in-law, who had once worked closely with Justice Varma, and her husband, it emerged during the probe, were not even in the country during the day of the incident. Their passports substantiated the same.

However, since the room had been methodically cleaned, it was impossible for the probe team to estimate the amount of cash – burnt or otherwise – present in the room.

Justice Varma had also claimed that the room where the fire broke out was not part of his Tughlaq Road official residence, and that the room always remained unlocked, accessible to any person who visited the residence. This claim, too, was found to have been untrue. 

Sources told The Leaflet that there were several attempts to hoodwink the probe panel but the same failed miserably.

“The committee found that the room was kept locked and it was only after the fire incident that the lock was broken open to allow fire-fighters to enter the room. This was confirmed to the probe team by witnesses,” said the source.

Sources told The Leaflet that there were several attempts to hoodwink the probe panel but the same failed miserably.

The probe team was also made aware of the identities of some lawyers, at least two whom were known for being “extremely close” to some judges – past and present. Some of these lawyers were known to frequently meet the judge.

Prima facie, a fit case for impeachment

When given the choice to resign or face further action, Justice Varma  refused to resign and now his fate is in the hands of the Central government. Unless the Centre decides to sit on the CJI’s recommendation, something it did with regard to another former Allahabad High Court Judge, SN Shukla, who was allowed to retire without facing impeachment proceedings despite recommendation by the then CJI, Dipak Mishra, Justice Varma will have to explain his actions and conduct.

“Prime facie it is a fit case for impeachment. But, it is for the government to take the matter forward,” said the source.

Courtesy: The Leaflet