Judge Cash Row: 3-member panel raises red flags underlines “implied responsibility”, “misconduct” by Justice Varma

The report, indicting Justice Verma was formally submitted on May 4 to then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna. After the CJI forwarded the report to President Draupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the government has initiated the process for bringing an impeachment motion against Justice Varma in the upcoming Monsoon Session of Parliament.

“The half-burnt currency notes seen and found during the process of dousing of fire are highly suspicious items and more so are not of small amount or denomination which could not have been placed in the store room without the tacit or active consent of Justice Varma or his family members,” the report said.

“Therefore, it is well nigh impossible for currency to be planted in the store room of a sitting Judge, which is being monitored by static 1+4 guard and a PSO stationed at the gate at all time, apart from the fact that the house abounds with a large number of old and trusted domestic servants with over six staff quarters,” the report added.

On the issue of lapses by the police, and why a panchnama was not made by the Tughlaq Road police immediately after the fire was doused, the panel said that while the police were “slipshod” in its action, the issue was beyond their remit.

“The ambit of the Committee is not to find fault with the action or inaction of the fire personnel or the police personnel as discussed above and, therefore, it would not be appropriate for us to comment upon the manner in which the fire personnel or the police personnel have gone about concluding the proceedings without preparing a proper Panchnama or seizure memo depicting the correct situation at the spot which can only be termed as slip shod,” the report said.

Significantly, the panel also specified that its inquiry of 55 witnesses including Justice Varma and his daughter, followed principles of natural justice but did not allow for cross-examination of witnesses or legal representation.

“The nature of the inquiry was to be fact finding without being formal judicial inquiry involving examination and cross examination of witnesses or representation by lawyers in -12- view of the law laid down in Additional District Judge vs. Registrar General High Court of Madhya Pradesh, (2015) 4 SCC 91.”

The Committee devised its own procedure, ensuring that “all the incriminating material, including the statements of all the witnesses recorded during the enquiry” was shared with Justice Varma and video recording the statements of the witnesses so that “could not be challenged at a subsequent point of time and also for confirmation whether such statements were in sum and substance recorded correctly.”