New Delhi, May 26: The Supreme Court has turned down an application filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act seeking a copy of the report of the top court-appointed in-house enquiry panel, which was formed to probe into cash-discovery allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma.

Rejecting the RTI application filed by a Maharashtra-based advocate, the apex court registry also refused to reveal the copy of communication written by then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna to the President and Prime Minister to take action against Justice Varma.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court, itself in a press statement, revealed that then CJI Khanna had forwarded to the President and the Prime Minister the report of the in-house enquiry panel.

"Chief Justice of India, in terms of the In-House Procedure, has written to Hon’ble the President of India and Hon’ble the Prime Minister of India enclosing therewith copy of the 3-Member Committee report dated 03.05.2025 along with the letter/response dated 06.05.2025 received from Mr Justice Yashwant Varma," read a press statement released on May 8.

Justice Varma is embroiled in a controversy surrounding the alleged discovery of a huge pile of burnt cash in the storeroom attached to his bungalow in Delhi 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, the then CJI Khanna had constituted a 3-member committee to conduct an inquiry against Justice Varma.

Amid the in-house probe, Justice Varma was transferred from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court.

The Supreme Court Collegium had recommended that the Centre repatriate Justice Varma to his parent High Court, i.e. the Allahabad HC.

Last week, a 2-judge Bench of the Supreme Court refused to entertain a plea seeking criminal prosecution of Justice Varma.

"There was an in-house inquiry report. It has been forwarded to the President of India and the Prime Minister of India for action. If you are seeking a writ of mandamus, you have to first make a representation to those authorities before which the issue is pending," a bench headed by Justice Abhay S. Oka told advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara, the lead petitioner-in-person.

"You make a representation calling upon them (the President and the PM) to take action. If they don't take action, then you can come here," added the Bench, also comprising Justice Ujjal Bhuyan.

If Justice Varma has committed the offence of accumulating wealth through corrupt means, an impeachment by itself will not suffice, said the petition, demanding his criminal prosecution. "It was indisputable that the huge volumes of money that were burned and partly burned and clandestinely removed were nothing but bribe/corruption -- a crime punishable under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Prevention of Corruption Act. There was no official explanation as to why no FIR was registered and why the criminal law was not set into motion, which would have meant the seizure of the currency notes securing the crime location, the arrest of suspects, etc.," stated the plea.

--IANS

Argus News | argus news | Odisha Latest News, Breaking News, Trending News, Live TV