THE SUPREME COURT TODAY questioned Justice Yashwant Varma, a sitting judge of the Allahabad High Court, for challenging the report of a three-judge in-house committee that indicted him following the alleged recovery of unaccounted cash by Delhi Fire Service personnel on March 14, 2025, from a storeroom located outside his official residence during a fire-fighting operation.
A bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta and also comprising Justice Augustine George Masih asked, “Why did you appear before the (three-judge) inquiry committee? You should have raised all these points before the Court instead.”
The bench’s remarks came as senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Justice Varma, contended that the ‘in-house inquiry’ mechanism adopted in 1999 was not to be taken recourse to or be a parallel to the procedure provided under the Constitution and the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, for initiating the process of a judge’s removal for “misbehaviour or incapacity.”
Sibal argued that the process—starting with the formation of the in-house committee, followed by its May 3 report, and the May 8 recommendation for Justice Varma’s removal sent by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna—was unconstitutional. He pointed out that Articles 124(5), 217, and 218 of the Constitution, along with the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, exclusively govern the removal of a judge and require a formal process initiated in Parliament.
