The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday reserved its judgment in a high-profile case involving Justice Yashwant Varma, who has challenged the legality of an in-house inquiry committee that found him guilty of misconduct in connection with the recovery of cash from his official residence.
The matter was heard by a bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and A.G. Masih, who made strong observations on the conduct of Justice Varma, stating that his actions “do not inspire confidence.” The bench questioned why he had participated in the internal inquiry without challenging its formation at the outset.
“Why did you appear before the in-house inquiry committee and not challenge it then and there?” the court asked.Representing Justice Varma, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the in-house panel’s recommendation for removal was unconstitutional and procedurally flawed. Sibal insisted that such an action, if upheld, would set a dangerous precedent for the judiciary.
Sibal further contended that Justice Varma refrained from challenging the process earlier because of the release of an audio tape related to the case, which had already caused reputational harm.
During the proceedings, the court also addressed a separate petition by advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara, who sought the registration of an FIR against Justice Varma. However, the bench rebuked Nedumpara for approaching the court directly without first filing a complaint with the police.
“Have you even filed a police complaint before asking this court to direct an FIR?” Justice Datta questioned sharply.
The court reiterated that while executive action on such matters may be “political,” the judiciary must uphold due process to preserve institutional integrity.
“Whether to proceed or not proceed is a political decision. But the judiciary has to send a message to society that due process has been followed,” the bench remarked.
