New Delhi

The Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to give an out-of-turn hearing on a plea seeking direction to the Delhi Police to register an FIR and cause an effective and meaningful investigation into the allegations that a huge pile of burnt cash was discovered at the bungalow of Justice Yashwant Varma of the Delhi High Court.

When the matter was mentioned for an urgent listing, a bench headed by CJI Sanjiv Khanna told advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara, the party in person, to not “make public statements”.

“Sorry, Mr. Nedumpara,” said CJI Khanna, adding that the registry will list the petition in due course.

Questioning the non-registration of FIR on March 14 itself, the day this unaccounted cash was reportedly found after a fire brigade had gone to Delhi HC judge Justice Varma's residence to douse a fire, the petition said that the delay on the part of the authorities concerned to make available to the public the electronic records leads to the irresistible inference that what was going on was an attempt at a cover-up.

“Why no arrests were made, why the money was not seized, why no mahazar was prepared, why the criminal law was not put into motion. Why did it take almost a week for the public to know about the scandal? Justice Varma, in his explanation, has stated that it is not his money, that he never kept any money, and he is fully taken aback by it. Then why did he not report to the police and seek the registration of an FIR of an attempt to falsely implicate him,” the petition further said.

“The case at hand is an open and shut case. It is a case of holding black money accumulated by selling justice. Even attempting to believe Justice Varma’s own version, the question remains as to why he did not file an FIR. Filing an FIR, even belatedly, is absolutely necessary to enable the police to investigate the conspiracy aspect,” contended the plea.

It said: “In Justice Yashwant Varma’s case, no FIR has been filed to the knowledge of the petitioners. The public perception is that every effort will be made to cover up the issue, to the extent even the initial statements regarding recovery of money are now being refuted.”

Further, it sought the declaration that the three-member panel constituted by the SC Collegium has no jurisdiction to conduct an investigation into the incident and is void ab initio since it constitutes various cognisable offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

Saying that the corruption in the judiciary substantially and directly infringes the fundamental rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution, the petitioners said that they, as citizens of the country, have every right, unquestionable locus standi, to directly petition the SC.

The plea questioned the judgement of a five-judge Constitution Bench in K. Veeraswami vs. Union of India case, where it was held that no criminal case should be registered against a judge of the High Court, Chief Justice of a High Court or judge of the Supreme Court unless the Chief Justice of India (CJI) is consulted in the matter.

“The said observation of the Court is one rendered per incuriam, in ignorance of law and sub silentio, without noticing that the police are under a statutory duty to register an FIR when it receives information of a cognisable offence, and the said direction of the Court is nothing short of restraining the police from discharging their statutory duty,” it said.

The plea said that such a direction creates a special class of judges, immune from the penal laws of the land and has stood in the way of an FIR being registered even in an offence involving POCSO.

A Supreme Court-appointed 3-member committee commenced its probe on Tuesday against Justice Yashwant Varma of the Delhi HC. The inquiry panel visited Justice Varma’s official residence and reportedly spent over half an hour inside the bungalow, where, allegedly, a huge pile of burnt cash was discovered in the storeroom after the fire brigade had gone there to douse a blaze on March 14.

Following the alleged cash discovery, which sent shockwaves across the judicial corridors, CJI Sanjiv Khanna had constituted a 3-member committee to conduct an inquiry against Justice Varma and asked the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court not to assign him any judicial work for the time being.

"The Chief Justice of India has constituted a three-member committee consisting of Mr Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Mr Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, and Ms Anu Sivaraman, Judge of the High Court of Karnataka, for conducting an inquiry into the allegations against Mr Justice Yashwant Varma, a sitting Judge of the High Court of Delhi,” said a statement released by the Supreme Court.

On Monday, Delhi HC's Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya withdrew judicial work from Justice Varma, the second senior-most judge of the Delhi High Court, till further orders.

ALSO READ: Valley couple to set up printmaking Studio and Art Residency in Srinagar

Later in the day, the Supreme Court Collegium, headed by CJI Khanna, recommended that the Centre repatriate Justice Varma to the Allahabad High Court. "The Supreme Court Collegium in its meetings held on 20th and 24th March 2025 has recommended repatriation of Mr Justice Yashwant Varma, Judge, High Court of Delhi, to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad," said a statement uploaded on the website of the apex court on Monday.