Cash pile at Judge's home: SC plea seeks FIR, Delhi Police probe
text_fields
New Delhi: A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking a directive for the Delhi Police to register an FIR and conduct a thorough investigation into the allegations surrounding the discovery of a large amount of burnt cash at the residence of Delhi High Court judge, Justice Yashwant Varma. The plea, filed by Mumbai-based lawyer Mathews J Nedumpara and others, questions the delay in initiating a criminal case and claims that the incident suggests a possible attempt to cover up wrongdoing.
The petition argues that despite the reported recovery of unaccounted cash on March 14, no FIR has been lodged, and authorities have not made electronic records of the discovery available to the public. It raises several concerns, including why no arrests were made, why the cash was not seized, and why no legal action was taken immediately. It also questions why Justice Varma himself did not file a complaint if, as he has claimed, the money did not belong to him and he was unaware of its presence.
Calling the case an “open and shut” matter of black money linked to corruption, the petition states that even if Justice Varma’s assertion is accepted, an FIR is still necessary to investigate the possibility of a conspiracy. The plea alleges that public perception is that efforts are being made to cover up the incident, especially as initial statements about the cash recovery are now being refuted.
Furthermore, the petition challenges the jurisdiction of the three-member panel set up by the Supreme Court Collegium to investigate the matter, arguing that its formation is invalid since the case involves cognizable offenses under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). It also criticizes the long-standing Supreme Court ruling in 'K. Veeraswami v. Union of India', which requires consultation with the Chief Justice of India (CJI) before a criminal case can be registered against a sitting High Court or Supreme Court judge. The petitioners contend that this judgment is flawed and has led to a situation where judges are treated as a special class immune from criminal prosecution, even in cases involving serious offenses.
The petitioners assert that judicial corruption directly infringes upon fundamental rights under Part III of the Constitution and argue that they have unquestionable legal standing to approach the Supreme Court for redress. They maintain that the law mandates the police to register an FIR upon receiving information about a cognizable offense, and any attempt to prevent this constitutes interference in the discharge of statutory duties.
On Friday, Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna formed a three-member panel to probe the allegations against Justice Varma. The committee includes Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the Punjab & Haryana High Court; Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court; and Justice Anu Sivaraman of the Karnataka High Court.
A press statement from the Supreme Court confirmed the committee’s formation and stated that, for the time being, the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court has been instructed not to assign any judicial work to Justice Varma.
With IANS inputs