Justice Yashwant Varma: Many Unanswered Questions

Since today morning, media reports quoting the Delhi police have indicated that at about 11:30 PM on the night of March 14, 2025, a  fire broke out at the residential premises of Justice Yashwant Varma, sitting judge of the Delhi High Court. Media reports have further stated that a call regarding a fire in a storeroom was received by the  police. Reportedly, two fire vehicles were sent and the fire was doused within fifteen minutes.

When fire tenders and police reached the spot to douse the flames, reportedly, they stumbled upon stacks of liquid cash. Reports also suggest that “jute sacks full of cash” were found “stashed in a corner of the outhouse” of the residence.

It was further reported that the members of the Supreme Court Collegium were apprised of a video, purportedly, of “burning cash” at Justice Varma’s residence. These reports, of course, leave several questions unanswered. 

1. What was the cause of the fire? 

2. More importantly, was any FIR lodged under Section 326(f) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, for “causing mischief by inundation, fire or explosive substances “, an offence punishable with seven years of  imprisonment and fine? 

   If not, why was this not done? 

   Reports also suggest that no official record or seizure of cash was made by officials. An investigation  into the cause of the fire may provide valuable clues that could effectively aid in untangling the  facts relating to this case.

3. What must we understand by the expression  “burning cash”? Does it indicate that the cash was deliberately set on fire or was it consumed by the flames when the fire broke out in the house?

Notably, the incident occurred seven days ago, on March 14, and it was not until today that the press began to widely report on this incident, and the subsequent discovery. 

Why has there been such an inordinate delay in the communication of this information to the press in a matter concerning the credibility of the Indian judiciary, in which the entire country has an interest?

When did the Supreme Court Collegium learn of the event? More importantly, we must ask how the Collegium was apprised of this information, and what source it relied on to access this information.

Media reports have further indicated that the judge in question has been transferred to the Allahabad High Court, his parent High Court, based on a unanimous decision of the Collegium. But why is there no Collegium resolution to date specifying about the transfer, or indicating the reasons for the transfer? This is particularly important because we have no information regarding whether any explanation was sought by the Collegium before deciding on the transfer or what explanations, if any, were provided by Justice Varma? 

An investigation  into the cause of the fire may provide valuable clues that could effectively aid in untangling the  facts relating to this case.

To say that the incident has deeply disturbed members of the legal profession does not sufficiently capture just how significantly these unanswered questions have eroded faith in the credibility of the functioning of our judiciary.

A judge unfit to perform judicial functions in Delhi is equally unfit to perform those duties in Allahabad. 

The action taken by the Collegium, of transferring the judge, does not meet the ends of justice. Indeed, it compounds the issue by calling into question the inability of the Collegium in dealing with issues of misconduct by sitting judges. In past instances where similar circumstances have emerged, the judge in question has asked to go on leave or work has been withdrawn . In line with the fundamental principle of law, the appropriate procedure is the immediate suspension of work of the person concerned, pending an enquiry into the allegation.

We need to remind ourselves that judges are not above the law and are covered by the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The only limitation that exists is that the Chief Justice of India must give sanction for the prosecution of a sitting judge.

We need to remind ourselves that judges are not above the law and are covered by the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

In the interest of fairness , transparency and accountability, we call upon the Supreme Court Collegium to issue a statement on the precise facts relating to the fire and the subsequent recovery of cash, specify the amount of money recovered, and indicate the action it proposes to take.  

Pending action, we call upon the Collegium to request the judge in question to proceed on leave and suspend the assignment of all work until the air is cleared . Such a statement will not only be in public interest but also in the interests of the judge concerned and in order to put an end to all unnecessary speculation. 

Courtesy: The Leaflet