SC Reserves Verdict on Justice Varma’s Plea

New Delhi

The Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) cannot act merely as a "post office" when serious charges are raised against a judge, and has a duty to initiate appropriate action based on evidence.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih reserved its order on a petition filed by Justice Yashwant Varma, challenging the in-house committee’s recommendation to initiate his removal following the alleged discovery of unaccounted cash at his official residence in March.

The court said the CJI is constitutionally empowered to assess misconduct and recommend proceedings to the President. "He is the guardian of the judiciary and not just a forwarding authority," the bench remarked.

Justice Varma, represented by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, argued that the in-house procedure violated Article 124, lacked safeguards like cross-examination, and was triggered without a formal complaint. He also said the process undermined his dignity and reputation.

The bench countered that the in-house inquiry is preliminary, not punitive, and its findings are not binding on Parliament. It also questioned Varma's decision to first participate in the process and later challenge it, suggesting he acted only after the committee’s findings went against him.

The court clarified that the inquiry does not establish guilt or determine the ownership of the seized cash, and any removal would require independent Parliamentary scrutiny.

Justice Varma has also alleged that media leaks and official disclosures compromised his right to a fair process.