Whose Cash, Why No FIR: Justice Varma Case Puts Judiciary On Trial, Sparks Rare Political Unanimity
The purported cash recovery from Justice Yashwant Varma’s residence has brought into sharp focus the question of judicial transparency and whether any position of power should override principles of law and due process
Both the BJP and Congress are united in their criticism, with a social media campaign against Justice Yashwant Varma as well as demanding answers. While the incidents triggered debates on the collegium system, a fundamental question remains – in the case of “ordinary" people, unaccounted cash of such a magnitude would automatically trigger FIRs and income tax (I-T) raids. Does the law – Indian Penal Code (IPC), Code of Criminal Procedure (now Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) – exempt sitting judges?
related stories
Beyond political statements, the incident raises tough questions: Whose cash was it? Why was there no immediate FIR or I-T action? And, was the sudden fire a mere coincidence or to destroy evidence? It has brought into sharp focus the question of judicial transparency and whether any position of power should override principles of law and due process.
LIMITED TO NO INFORMATION ON POLICE PROBE
What do we really know about the forensics, remains of the cash, approximate amount allegedly burnt and found? The answer is? Not much.
This is because there was no FIR or even a basic police diary to establish if the fire was arson or caused by a short circuit. Even though Justice Varma, in his defence, denied having any knowledge about the cash, there is no police probe yet to determine whose cash it was? There is, meanwhile, loads of unverified information, photos, and clips flooding social media.
The Supreme Court has formed a three-member committee to look into the matter, and until the report comes in, the judge has been taken off his responsibilities in the Delhi High Court and was further repatriated to the Allahabad High Court, whose bar association has protested the move.
News18 spoke to retired judges, senior I-T and Enforcement Directorate officials, as well as senior advocates of the SC and some peers in the Allahabad HC. They unanimously agreed that the law must be seen as equal and impartial, especially for those entrusted with interpreting it.
“A judge cannot evade responsibility – how the cash arrived at his premises demands answers. No justification can override moral accountability; he should have resigned for the sanctity of the judiciary. For any ordinary citizen, such a case would trigger FIRs under the Prevention of Corruption Act, PMLA, and IT Act, with prompt action," said Bikash Bhattacharya, a senior advocate of the SC and Calcutta HC. He is also an MP in the Rajya Sabha from the CPM.
“Impeachment talk is often rendered bogus along political lines. This is part of a larger money laundering chain and demands a full criminal investigation by the CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation). The suspicious fire raises serious questions of mischief or arson under Section 436 of the IPC," he said.
CAN A SITTING JUDGE BE INVESTIGATED?
The allegedly unaccounted cash discovered at Justice Varma’s residence has jolted the legal and political establishment alike. While the judge reportedly offered explanations and judicial inquiries are underway, experts said he is not beyond or above the law.
“This is clear misconduct. Arson or mischief cannot erase evidence. An FIR is imperative. No one can be a self-proclaimed exception – income tax and anti-corruption laws apply equally. In the ordinary course, the presence of the President and governor as appointing authorities doesn’t stop enforcement. The question is whether this particular conduct compels the competent authority to take suo motu cognizance. The discovery of unclaimed cash under Section 102 CrPC (corresponding BNSS) sufficiently indicates a crime," a retired judge told News18 on condition of anonymity.
“The police are compelled to investigate ownership, possession, and culpability. Once law enforcement is aware of cash that prima facie appears ill-gotten, why have they not established ownership or possession? If it indicates a culpable crime, under which section is it being addressed? What prevents the police or IT authorities from acting?" the judge asked.
As the controversy raged, a senior advocate of the Allahabad HC also demanded a CBI inquiry. “A CBI inquiry is essential – there’s clearly something fishy here. It is not just what we are seeing; there’s something else beneath the surface. Has someone been made a scapegoat? The collegium system must not shield anyone. Only a detailed, transparent inquiry can restore faith," the senior advocate said.
THE COLLEGIUM DEBATE HEATS UP
The controversy over the incident has reignited the debate over the collegium system and the alleged lack of accountability in judicial appointments. “It would have been different had the NJAC (National Judicial Appointments Commission) Act been in place. Every procedure and mechanism would have ensured accountability. But it was struck down. Had that system existed, such situations could have been handled transparently. Ad hocism is not going to do any good to the sanctity or credibility of the judiciary," said Justice L Narasimha Reddy, a former chief justice of the Patna High Court and ex-chairperson of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT).
At its core, this case is now a litmus test of whether the Indian justice system will uphold the principle of equality before the law, or allow privilege to shield those in power.
- Location :
- First Published: