Breaking: Petition In Supreme Court Seeking FIR Against Justice Yashwant Varma

A petition has been filed before the Supreme Court challenging the immunity granted to judges from immediate criminal prosecution, citing the recent controversy involving Justice Yashwant Varma.

The petitioners, who are lawyers and concerned citizens, have urged the Court to revisit the precedent set in K. Veeraswami v. Union of India (1991), which mandates prior consultation with the Chief Justice of India (CJI) before registering an FIR against sitting judges.

The petition by Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara argues that this judicially created exception violates the principle of "equality before law" enshrined in the Constitution. It asserts that while the judiciary is sovereign in adjudication, law enforcement agencies must be free to investigate criminal offenses involving judges without prior approval.

The controversy stems from allegations of corruption against Justice Yashwant Varma. "In retrospect, the protection which the founding fathers ingrained in the constitution has become counterproductive. The Petitioners are forced to say so because of many instances of malpractice, corruption and improbity that they come across literally every other day. The latest being the news reports of the recovery of Rs. 15 crores or so in cash from the official residence of Justice Yashwant Varma by sheer accident. The media reports state that cash was found by firemen when a blaze broke out at the judge’s residence on the night of the Holi festival, the judge was not present at his residence, his family had called the emergency services. The information about the cash was passed onto the police, it travelled through the Government echelons and was finally conveyed to the Chief Justice of India," the petition states.

The petition questions why no FIR was lodged when large volumes of unaccounted cash were reportedly discovered and why the Supreme Court did not immediately disclose the incident to the public. It criticizes the decision of the collegium to conduct an internal inquiry instead of directing law enforcement to take action, arguing that such measures undermine public confidence in the judiciary.

"If it were a bureaucrat, politician or any other government official in the place of Justice Varma, an FIR would have been lodged in no time. The police would have started investigation, even made arrests and the newspapers would have reported it on the very same day. However, nothing of the sought can happen here. To a common man it would appear strange," the petition reads.

The petition further states, "In Justice Yashwant Varma’s case no FIR has been filed to the knowledge of the Petitioners. The public perception is that very effort will be made to cover up the issue, to the extent even the initial statements regarding recovery of money is now being refuted. However, the Supreme Court uploading on its website the report of the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi along with the explanation from Justice Varma and the video of the fire force dousing huge volumes of currency notes, has to some extend helped public trust to be restored."

The writ petition also cites past cases of judicial corruption, including the Justice Nirmal Yadav case, to emphasize the need for greater transparency and accountability in the higher judiciary. It calls for criminal prosecution against Justice Varma if evidence supports allegations of illicit wealth accumulation, stating that impeachment alone would be insufficient. "The Petitioner’s being lawyers and citizens consider that they have locus standi, nay, that is their bounden duty to take up the issue before this Hon’ble Court to ensure that if Justice Varma has in fact committed the offence of accumulating wealth through corrupt means, he shall be subjected to criminal prosecution, even an impeachment by itself will not suffice," it states.

The petitioners argue that an FIR must be registered without further delay to ensure a fair and impartial investigation into the incident, irrespective of Justice Varma’s position.

The Prayers sought are as follows:

a) To declare that the incident of recovery of huge sums of unaccounted money, reportedly Rs. 15 crores, from the official residence of Justice Yashwant Varma, by the fire force/police when their services for sought to douse fire, constitute a cognisable offence punishable under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and that the police is duty bound to register an FIR and that the observations in paragraph 60 of the judgment of the Supreme Court in K. Veeraswami v. UOI prohibiting that no criminal case shall be registered against a judge of a High court or Supreme Court without the prior permission of the Chief Justice of India is one rendered per incuriam and sub silentio;

b) To declare that the observations in paragraph 60 of the judgment in K. Veeraswami v. Union of India that no FIR shall be registered against the judges of the High Court or Supreme Court without the prior permission of the Chief Justice of India is one rendered per incuriam and sub silentio and that the police is duty bound to register an FIR when it receives information of a cognisable offence;

c) To declare that the 3-member Committee constituted by the collegium has no jurisdiction to conduct an investigation into the incident that occurred on 14th March, 2025, at the official residence of Justice Yashwant Varma where heaps of currency notes were by chance recovered in a fire constituting various cognisable under the BNS, and that the resolution of the collegium investing the Committee the power to conduct such an investigation is one rendered void ab initio inasmuch as the collegium cannot confer jurisdiction upon itself to order so where the Parliament or the Constitution has conferred none;

d) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents/Delhi Police to register an FIR and cause an effective and meaningful investigation;

e) To issue a writ in the nature of prohibition or any other writ, order, or direction restraining and prohibiting any person or authority, even authorities as contemplated in K. Veeraswami’s case, from interfering with the sovereign policing function of the state, nay, in registering an FIR and investigating the crime.

It is to be noted that on March 22, the Supreme Court issued a press release stating the details of the inquiry report regarding the alleged discovery of a substantial amount of cash from the residence of Justice Varma. It also contains the photos and videos of the place.

The Supreme Court also added the link of the video as shared by the Commissioner of Police Delhi with the Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi. The link to the video is attached in the last page of the press release, as follows: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/3hrhoplxng3x561nc480t/Video-as-shared-by-the-Commissioner-of-Police-Delhi-with-the-Chief-Justice-of-the-High-Court-of-Delhi.mp4?rlkey=xwj8ygs5pwvv8blk79c1380ah&dl=0

However, Justice Yashwant Varma has denied allegations of unaccounted cash at his residence, calling it a conspiracy to malign him. He has clarified that the fire occurred in an outhouse, not his main residence, and no cash was found. He disputed media claims of cash recovery, stating neither he nor his staff saw any currency. He cited a report by the Delhi High Court Registrar that did not mention cash recovery. Alleging a smear campaign linked to past events, he emphasized his unblemished judicial record and called for an inquiry into his integrity and professional conduct.

Click here to read/download the Press Release Issued By Supreme Court