The Chief Justice of India has directed that Justice Varma should not be assigned any judicial work upon assuming charge at the Allahabad High Court.
The Transfer of Justice Varma
In a significant development, the Central Government has approved the transfer of Justice Yashwant Varma from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court. This decision comes amidst controversy surrounding the discovery of unaccounted cash at his official residence in New Delhi. The incident occurred on March 14, 2025, following a fire at his home, where semi-burnt wads of cash were reportedly found. As a result, Justice Varma has been directed to assume charge at the Allahabad High Court but will not be assigned any judicial work for the time being.
The transfer decision was made under Article 222 of the Constitution of India, which allows the President to transfer judges from one High Court to another after consulting the Chief Justice of India. This move is part of a broader process that also includes the repatriation of another Delhi High Court judge, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, to the Allahabad High Court. Justice Singh’s transfer had been pending for months and was recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium in November 2024.
Background and Controversy
The controversy surrounding Justice Varma began when a fire broke out at his Lutyens’ Delhi home, leading to the discovery of a significant amount of cash. This incident prompted an in-house inquiry by the Supreme Court, which appointed a three-member committee to investigate the matter. Justice Varma has denied any involvement, stating that neither he nor his family members placed the cash in the storeroom. Despite these denials, the incident has had significant repercussions for Justice Varma’s role at the Delhi High Court. His name was absent from recently reconstituted administrative committees, and his judicial work was withdrawn following a directive from the Chief Justice of India.
The decision to transfer Justice Varma has been met with protests from the Allahabad High Court Bar Association, which has launched an indefinite strike. The association expressed its dissent against the Supreme Court Collegium’s recommendation to transfer Justice Varma, citing concerns about judges facing corruption charges. Despite these protests, the Supreme Court has emphasized that the transfer decision is separate from the ongoing inquiry into the cash discovery.
Implications and Future Developments
The transfer of Justice Varma to the Allahabad High Court without the assignment of judicial work reflects the ongoing scrutiny he faces. The Supreme Court’s decision to keep him away from judicial duties indicates a cautious approach while the investigation is underway. This situation highlights the challenges faced by the judiciary in maintaining public trust and ensuring that judges are held to high standards of integrity.
As the investigation continues, it remains to be seen how this situation will unfold. The protests by the Allahabad High Court Bar Association underscore the broader implications of such incidents on the judiciary’s reputation. The government and the judiciary will need to navigate these challenges carefully to maintain public confidence in the legal system.
Related Developments and Reactions
In addition to Justice Varma’s transfer, the repatriation of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh to the Allahabad High Court has also been approved. Both justices were transferred to the Delhi High Court in October 2021. The recent developments have sparked discussions about the role of the judiciary in maintaining transparency and accountability.
The reaction from the legal community, particularly the protests by the Allahabad High Court Bar Association, indicates a strong stance against any perceived wrongdoing within the judiciary. This stance reflects a broader desire for transparency and accountability in the legal system.
Ongoing Investigations and Future Steps
The investigation into the discovery of cash at Justice Varma’s residence is ongoing, with the Supreme Court emphasizing that the transfer decision is separate from the inquiry. This distinction is crucial as it allows for a thorough investigation without prejudice to Justice Varma’s career.
As the situation unfolds, it will be important to monitor how the judiciary and the government address these challenges. The maintenance of public trust in the legal system will depend on how effectively these issues are handled.
Question to Readers: How do you think the judiciary should balance the need for accountability with the principle of innocence until proven guilty in cases like Justice Varma’s?
By
By
