Listen To This Post

Justice Varma was repatriated from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court after burnt currency notes were found at his official residence in New Delhi on March 14. An in-house inquiry committee appointed earlier found him guilty of misconduct.

New Delhi: Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma on Wednesday opposed before the Supreme Court of India the constitution of an inquiry committee by the Lok Sabha Speaker to probe corruption allegations against him, arguing that the move was contrary to constitutional and statutory procedure.

Appearing for Justice Varma, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi told a Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma that impeachment motions against the judge were moved in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha on the same day—July 21, 2025. Under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, he argued, an inquiry committee in such circumstances must be constituted jointly by both Houses, and not unilaterally by the Lok Sabha Speaker.

Rohatgi contended that since the motion in the Rajya Sabha was later rejected, the inquiry committee set up by the Lok Sabha Speaker on August 12 was “non est in law”. He also challenged the Deputy Chairman’s rejection of the Rajya Sabha motion after it had been admitted earlier, asserting that once motions are initiated simultaneously, the law mandates a joint process.

The Bench, however, questioned whether rejection of a motion in one House would automatically invalidate proceedings in the other, noting that the Act does not expressly bar the Lok Sabha from proceeding if the Rajya Sabha rejects a motion. The hearing is continuing.

Justice Varma was repatriated from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court after burnt currency notes were found at his official residence in New Delhi on March 14. An in-house inquiry committee appointed earlier found him guilty of misconduct. After he declined to resign, the then Chief Justice of India forwarded the report to the President and the Prime Minister, paving the way for impeachment proceedings.

Justice Varma has sought the quashing of the Speaker’s action admitting the removal motion and all subsequent proceedings, maintaining that the entire process violates Article 124(5) of the Constitution and the Judges (Inquiry) Act.