Supreme Court collegium’s decision to transfer Justice Varma to Allahabad High Court falls short of public expectations as the case raises several disturbing questions that need to be answered
The Judiciary enjoys the highest public respect in India for its expected fairness, objectivity and impartiality in delivering justice to the common man. If this sacred institution itself comes under a cloud, it could lead to the erosion of public faith in the system, a dangerous prospect for democracy. Reports of recovery of unaccounted cash from the official residence of Justice Yashwant Varma, a judge of the Delhi High Court, has sent shock waves across the legal community, bringing the judiciary under scrutiny. A fire at his bungalow uncovered “jute sacks full of cash stashed in a corner of the outhouse”, raising concerns of illicit funds. The Supreme Court collegium’s decision to transfer Justice Varma to the Allahabad High Court falls short of public expectations as the case raises several disturbing questions that need to be answered. There was an inexplicable delay in reporting the fire accident. 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. An investigation into the cause of the fire may provide valuable clues that could effectively aid in untangling the facts relating to this case. In line with the fundamental principle of law, the appropriate procedure is the immediate suspension of work of the person concerned, pending an inquiry into the allegation. Judges are not above the law and are covered by the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
One of the key questions in this case is the exact amount of cash discovered. While videos recorded immediately after the fire reportedly showed half-burnt currency notes, no official figure has been disclosed regarding the total amount found. Also, there is no clarity on who took possession of the recovered cash, with both the Delhi Police and Justice Varma denying any knowledge of its whereabouts. A thorough probe must be ordered to get to the bottom of the facts as the credibility of the higher judiciary is at stake. The onus is on courts and probe agencies to fast-track the proceedings in such cases in the interests of truth, justice and judicial accountability. An inordinate delay in finding definitive answers will only worsen the situation. Any controversy that undermines public trust in the Judiciary should be probed thoroughly within a specific timeline. As per the current procedures, any inquiry against a sitting judge can only be done under the Judges Enquiry Act which mandates that only the Chief Justice of India (CJI) can constitute a probe panel. Any action to remove the judge concerned can only be initiated if the panel finds him guilty. The report is then forwarded to the CJI who sends the recommendation to the President. The Constitution allows a judge to be removed only by an order of the President based on an impeachment motion passed by both Houses of Parliament.
