The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a petition by the Allahabad High Court’s Justice Yashwant Varma challenging an in-house inquiry report on unaccounted cash found at his home, and a recommendation to remove him on the basis of it, Bar and Bench reported.

The court said that the inquiry had legal sanction and did not violate Varma’s fundamental rights.

Varma had challenged the recommendation made by former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna to impeach him in the unaccounted cash row. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih had reserved its judgement on his petition on July 30.

The bench had remarked that Varma’s conduct did not inspire confidence, as he only moved the top court after the in-house committee came out with adverse findings against him. The court had asked him why he did not challenge the committee at the outset if he believed it was unconstitutional.

Unaccounted cash was allegedly recovered at Varma’s official residence in Delhi when emergency services responded to a fire there on March 14. He was a judge at the Delhi High Court at that time. The judge said he was in Bhopal when the cash was discovered and claimed that it did not belong to him or his family.

Amid the row, he was transferred to the Allahabad High Court.

The report of the in-house inquiry committee into the matter, released on May 3, concluded that there was “sufficient substance” in the charges against Varma. It held that the judge’s misconduct was “serious enough to call for initiation of proceedings for removal”.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court said that the petition could not be entertained, as Varma had first participated in the inquiry and then questioned its competence to hold the proceedings, Live Law reported.

‘In-house panel scrupulously followed process’

The court verbally said that former Chief Justice Khanna and the in-house committee “scrupulously followed the process except uploading photos and video [on the Supreme Court website]”. However, it said that the uploading of the photos and video would not affect the case at hand, and also noted that Varma did not challenge it at the opportune time.

The video and photographs, uploaded on March 22, showed a fireman pulling out half-burnt wads of money from a room.

Sibal had argued that a judge could only be removed on the grounds of "proved misbehaviour" or "incapacity" under Article 124(4) of the Constitution, Live Law reported. He contended that in view of this, the in-house process allowing the chief justice to write to the president recommending that impeachment proceedings against Varma be initiated was unconstitutional.

Datta, however, said that the in-house proceedings only constituted a preliminary inquiry. He said that when its report was not even to be treated as evidence, Varma could not be aggrieved at this stage.

Also read: