Cash Found at Justice Yashwant Varma's Home: Three-Member Panel to Take Forensic Dept Help to Probe Burnt Notes' Videos

New Delhi: As the Delhi judge cash-burning controversy deepens, the three-member panel set up by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna will seek the help of the forensic department to investigate the matter. The panel is scheduled to hold its first meeting today to commence its inquiry into allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma.

The panel comprises Justices Sheel Nagu, G.S. Sandhawalia, and Anu Sivaraman and will conduct a detailed inquiry. However, no timeline has been set for the conclusion of the probe.

The inquiry panel will examine the facts and will be assisted by experts to analyze the judge’s call data records and IP details.

Forensic experts will also verify the authenticity of the video showing burnt cash, which was reportedly shot by first responders. Additionally, they will examine whether the location where the cash was burnt matches the storeroom at the judge’s residence.

The Senior judges from Punjab & Haryana , Himachal Pradesh , and Karnataka will also interrogate Justice Varma’s staff and personal assistants regarding the burnt cash.

Earlier, Delhi High Court Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyay submitted a report to the CJI in connection with the case, which included photos and videos of stacks of burnt cash at Justice Varma’s official residence.

Meanwhile, Justice Varma has not been assigned any judicial work during the inquiry.

The CJI’s next course of action regarding Justice Varma will be based on the findings of the inquiry.

What Does the Procedure for Investigating a Supreme Court Judge Include?

In 2014, the Supreme Court established a procedure for investigating allegations against judges in constitutional courts.

The first stage of this process involves assessing the prima facie veracity of the allegations. This initial stage does not require a deeper examination of the details but instead calls for an assessment based on the contents of the complaint and the response of the concerned judge.

Following this, the Chief Justice of the High Court is responsible for deciding whether a more in-depth investigation is required. “This is to be done based on a logical assessment made after considering the response of the concerned judge in reference to the allegations leveled in the complaint,” the Supreme Court had ruled.

The second stage of the in-house procedure, which applies to sitting High Court judges, carries serious consequences and is directly overseen by the CJI.

The Chief Justice of India will only approve a deeper investigation if he agrees with the Chief Justice of the High Court and approves the formation of a three-member committee to move the investigation to the next stage.

“This committee will comprise two Chief Justices of High Courts (other than the concerned High Court) and a judge of a High Court. The second stage involves a deeper probe,” the Supreme Court stated.

The three-member panel has the liberty to establish its own procedure for investigating the matter.

“For the first time, the authenticity of the allegations will be probed through an inquiry. The members of the three-member committee will have no connection with the concerned judge. The judge will be given a fair opportunity to refute the allegations, while the complainant will have the assurance that the investigation is unbiased. The in-house procedure was devised to eliminate favoritism, prejudice, or bias,” the court stated.

The Supreme Court also noted that the panel’s report could lead to one of two conclusions:
1.    That there is no substance in the allegations against the concerned judge, or
2.    That there is sufficient substance in the allegations to warrant action.

Possible Actions if Allegations Are Found Valid

If the three-member committee finds the allegations to be valid, the CJI will take the following steps:
1.    The concerned judge will be advised by the Chief Justice of India to resign or seek voluntary retirement.
2.    If the judge refuses to comply, the Chief Justice of India will instruct the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court to refrain from allocating any judicial work to the judge.