The Lok Sabha Committee inquiring into allegations in opposition to Justice Yashwant Varma, former decide of the Allahabad and Delhi Excessive Court docket, has concluded that each one three Articles of Cost framed in opposition to him are proved, with the panel discovering substantial unexplained forex at his official residence, failure to protect materials proof after its discovery, and evasive and deceptive explanations by the decide.
The report of the Committee, constituted beneath the Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968 by the Speaker in August 2025, was tabled within the Lok Sabha right now.
The committee had framed three Articles of expenses in opposition to Justice Varma: discovery and possession of unexplained forex; second, failure to protect the fabric proof, and thirdly, the deceptive explanations given as to why there was unaccounted money on the first place.
Money present in official residential premises
The committee mentioned its first cost involved the invention and possession of unexplained Indian forex in a storeroom on the decide’s official residence at 30, Tughlaq Crescent, New Delhi.
It discovered that substantial portions of ₹500 notes – described by witnesses as bundles, heaps and stacks of burnt, half-burnt, moist and scattered notes – have been current within the storeroom following the fireplace of March 14-15, 2025. A number of Delhi Fireplace Providers and police personnel testified to seeing the forex, with photographic and digital materials additionally supporting their accounts.
The committee famous that there was failure to protect the forex notes, which made it not possible to find out the precise quantity discovered contained in the storeroom. However that the massive quantity of forex was discovered within the official residence, the place there was even a locked liquor cupboard, establishes the truth that the decide had efficient management.
Justice Varma had argued all through the proceedings that he had no entry to the storeroom as the identical was indifferent from the official residence. The committee additionally discovered that Justice Varma failed to present any passable clarification as to the possession of unaccounted money. The committee mentioned when a considerable quantity of forex is present in an official residence of a decide, the reason supplied should not merely be primary denial.
Contemplating many elements, the committee arrived at a conclusion that the primary set of expenses are proved. Nonetheless, it clarified that the recording does not pertain to a discovering of direct private possession of forex notes in a felony sense.
“What stands established is that substantial unexplained forex notes have been discovered throughout the official premises occupied by the decide; that the storeroom fashioned a part of these premises, and the decide didn’t furnish a passable clarification concerning its presence, supply or possession.”
Proof was not preserved
The committee discovered that the failure to protect the burnt forex notes was a “materials lapse” on the a part of the police; nevertheless it doesn’t have an effect on the truth that the officers “noticed” and “recognized” the forex.
The forex and the situation of the storeroom weren’t correctly preserved earlier than the positioning was sealed and inspected. The notes weren’t seized or inventoried, no correct stock or panchnama was ready, and the storeroom was not instantly sealed. Cleansing subsequently happened after the primary responders had left. The forex later turned unavailable.
The committee hooked up explicit significance to proof that Justice Varma was involved with members of his family institution after the incident, together with his personal secretary Rajinder Singh Karki and family employees member Mohd. Rahil. A witness, C.G. Rawat, mentioned he noticed Karki and Rahil close to the storeroom engaged in cleansing after the fireplace had been extinguished.
The panel confused that it was not counting on direct proof that Justice Varma himself bodily eliminated the forex. As a substitute, it discovered that he didn’t safe and protect materials proof in premises beneath his institutional cost and that the disturbance of the scene resulted within the subsequent lack of proof.
The committee additionally rejected the argument that accountability rested solely with hearth and police officers. Whereas it acknowledged that these officers had themselves didn’t seize and protect the forex, it mentioned Justice Varma, having turn out to be conscious of the incident and being in communication with folks related with the premises, didn’t take steps to make sure that the forex was secured, inventoried or reported. Article II was consequently held proved.
Evasive/deceptive reply of decide
The committee said that originally the decide had fully refuted any claims of unaccounted money however considerably over a time period, shifted his defence to non-seizure of notes or chance of planting or bigger conspiracy.
It additionally famous that the decide did not lead any proof on this facet nor gave a listing of defence witnesses. In conclusion, it discovered the third expenses to be proved.
The panel additionally famous that Justice Varma withdrew from the proceedings after the presenting facet had accomplished its proof and witnesses had been cross-examined. Though the committee mentioned his withdrawal was not, by itself, proof of the cost, it thought of its significance within the context of his failure to provide proof supporting the factual allegations he had raised.
The committee mentioned his clarification was “evasive, incomplete and deceptive in impact.” It discovered that the response didn’t adequately handle the presence of considerable forex witnessed by unbiased officers, didn’t set out what inquiries had allegedly been made, and didn’t set up what steps had been taken to protect the positioning or substantiate allegations of foul play.
Concerning the Committee
The committee was constituted by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on August 12, 2025, to look at allegations regarding Justice Varma. The panel was headed by Supreme Court docket Justice Aravind Kumar and included the then Bombay Excessive Court docket Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar(since elevated to the SC) and Senior Advocate BV Acharya. It submitted its report back to Speaker Birla on Might 18, 2026.
The inquiry stems from the controversy following a hearth at Justice Varma’s official residence in New Delhi in March 2025, after which a big amount of alleged unaccounted money was discovered. Justice Varma, who denied wrongdoing, submitted his resignation as a Choose on April 10.
The committe prolonged its appreciation to Further Solicitor Generala Aishwarya Bhati and Raja Thakare, Senior Advocates Sidharth Luthra and Siddharth Aggarwal advocates Mr Karan Umesh Salvi and Ms. Sameeksha Dua.
