Politics
Archived — This article has been archived. The information may be outdated.
Lok Sabha panel says Varma withdrawal came too late
The Hindu··13 Aug
A three-member Lok Sabha inquiry has said Justice Yashwant Varma's April 9 withdrawal cannot end a statutory probe after evidence was already on record. The report, tabled in Parliament on August 12, found the charges proved and his explanations evasive. The panel said a judge under inquiry cannot unilaterally stop proceedings under the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968.
Prism
What It Means For You
- If you follow judicial accountability, the panel's point is that resignation on April 9 did not wipe out a statutory inquiry already recording evidence.
- Readers of the cash-at-residence case can note the committee treated all three charges as proved and said Varma did not testify on oath.
- Anyone watching Parliament can see the report was tabled on August 12, months after it reached the Speaker in May.
What's Happening
- The inquiry committee said Varma withdrew too late and that a statutory probe cannot depend on the unilateral decision of the judge under inquiry.
- Its report, tabled on August 12, found charges of unexplained cash, disturbed evidence and an evasive explanation proved.
- Varma resigned on April 9, the same day he wrote to the committee, the President and the Chief Justice of India withdrawing from the proceedings.
Why the Panel Continued After Resignation
- Firefighters at 30 Tughlaq Crescent on March 14, 2025 reported burnt currency in a storeroom, which led to an in-house inquiry and then a parliamentary motion.
- Then CJI Sanjiv Khanna had advised Varma to resign or retire; after he declined, Speaker Om Birla admitted a removal motion and constituted the statutory committee.
- The Judges Inquiry Act process is the fact-finding stage of parliamentary removal. The panel said it could proceed if the judge had been given a chance to join and then stayed away.
all-newseditors-picks
