SC rejects Justice Varma’s plea in cash discovery impeachment case

The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a plea filed by Allahabad High Court Justice Yashwant Varma who faces impeachment proceedings following the cashdiscovery row challenging the decision of the Lok Sabha Speaker to constitute a threemember inquiry committee against him under the Judges Inquiry Act 1968Pronouncing the operative part of the verdict a Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma said ldquoWe hold that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in the present caserdquoLast week the Justice Dattaled Bench had reserved its verdict on Justice Varmarsquos writ petition after hearing extensive arguments from all sidesIn his plea Justice Varma has challenged the Lok Sabha Speakerrsquos decision primarily on procedural grounds The plea argued that although impeachment notices were moved in both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on the same day Speaker Om Birla constituted the inquiry committee unilaterally without awaiting the Rajya Sabha Chairmanrsquos decision or holding the mandatory joint consultationIt was contended that the provison to Section 32 of the Judges Inquiry Act requires that when notices are given on the same day in both Houses no committee can be constituted unless the motion is admitted in both Houses and that too by joint action of the Speaker and the ChairmanHowever the Lok Sabha Secretariat opposed the plea arguing that the Rajya Sabha did not admit the impeachment motion It was highlighted that the motion was rejected by the Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman on August 11 2025 after the then Chairman and Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar resigned in JulyIt was further argued that the proviso to Section 32 did not apply and the Lok Sabha Speaker was well within his powers to proceed independentlySolicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha functionaries argued that the purpose of the proviso to Section 32 was only to avoid the constitution of two separate inquiry committees on the same allegationsThe Centrersquos secondhighest law officer submitted that admission of an impeachment motion is not automatic and requires application of mind by the presiding officer of the House concernedJustice Varma has been at the centre of controversy since burnt cash was allegedly discovered in an outhouse of his official residence in March 2025 when he was serving as a judge of the Delhi High CourtThough he was not present at the time of the fire a threemember inhouse inquiry committee constituted by the Supreme Court later concluded that he exercised secret or active control over the cash stashBased on the inquiry report the then Chief Justice of India CJI Sanjiv Khanna recommended initiation of removal proceedings In August last year the Supreme Court dismissed Justice Varmarsquos writ petition challenging the inhouse probe The apex court said that the inhouse procedure laid down is fair and just and does not compromise judicial independence which is a basic feature of the ConstitutionNotices of impeachment backed by 145 Lok Sabha members and 63 Rajya Sabha members were moved in both Houses of Parliament in July 2025 Subsequently the Lok Sabha Speaker announced the constitution of a threemember inquiry committee a decision that is now under challenge before the Supreme CourtThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever