The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday dismissed a petition which sought a court-monitored criminal probe into allegations of unaccounted cash allegedly recovered from the house of the official residence of former judge at the Allahabad High Court (HC) Yashwant Varma. The top court termed the plea an attempt of ‘cheap publicity’ and denied ordering the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) or the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT). 

A bench of the Apex court, comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe trashed the petition filed by advocate Ghanshyam Upadhyay, who sought criminal proceedings over the alleged recovery of cash from Justice Verma’s official residence in Delhi in March 2025. 

The bench remarked, “All cheap publicity. We are not inclined to entertain this… Dismissed," while refusing to entertain the plea. 

Petitioner says resignation does not end criminal liability

During the hearing, the petitioner contended that Justice Varma’s resignation from judicial office did not extinguish any criminal liability arising from the allegations. He further argued that a petition filed earlier had sought similar relief, and was dismissed on technical grounds because no complaint had been lodged with the probe agencies before the court was approached. 

As per the petitioner, a detailed complaint had since been submitted to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Delhi Police and the Enforcement Directorate (ED), yet no FIR had been registered. 

He went on to inform that Justice Varma, having demitted office, no longer enjoyed immunity from criminal prosecution and that the available material warranted an independent criminal probe. 

Cash recovery allegations sparked major row in judicial fraternity

The case dates back to March 2025, when a fire erupted at Justice Varma’s official residence in Delhi while he was serving as a judge of the Delhi HC. When the incident occurred, Justice Varma and his wife were travelling in Madhya Pradesh, while his daughter and mother were present at the house. 

Videos emerging from the scene showed bundles of currency notes burning during the fire, triggering widespread public attention and raising serious questions. Justice Varma categorically denied possessing any knowledge or ownership of the cash, maintaining that neither he nor any member of his family had kept money at the site. 

He described the allegations as part of a conspiracy to malign his reputation. 

In-house probe led to removal proceedings

Post-incident, the then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna ordered the formation of a three-member in-house inquiry committee to examine the allegations. The panel reportedly found Justice Khanna’s explanation unsatisfactory, prompting the CJI to ask him to resign or face impeachment proceedings.

After Justice Verma denied stepping down, the inquiry report, which also mentioned his response, was forwarded to the President and the Prime Minister with a recommendation to initiate the constitutional process for his removal. Subsequently, Varma was repatriated to the Allahabad HC, and judicial work was withdrawn from him pending further action. 

Later, the Parliamentary removal proceedings were initiated after notices were moved in both Houses. While the Lok Sabha admitted the motion and constituted a Judges Inquiry Committee, the Rajya Sabha declined to admit a parallel motion on procedural grounds. 

Notably, Justice Varma stepped down from his post on April 9 this year while the parliamentary inquiry was still ongoing. Post-resignation, he relinquished all judicial privileges, surrendered official amenities, revived his enrollment with the Bar Council and became eligible to resume private legal practice. 

The SC had earlier declined to intervene in the inquiry proceedings initiated under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, holding that the Lok Sabha speaker was competent to constitute the inquiry committee.