Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma
New Delhi: The Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna has written to the President of India and Prime Minister enclosing a copy of the three-judge committee, constituted by the CJI for a "deeper probe" into the cash discovery allegations against Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma.
In a press statement released on Thursday, the top court said, "Chief Justice of India, in terms of the In-House Procedure, has written to the President of India and the Prime Minister enclosing therewith copy of the three-member committee report dated May 3 along with the letter/response dated May 6 received from Justice Yashwant Varma".
According to people in the know, the three-judge committee found credible evidence which corroborated the accusations against Justice Varma. The committee submitted its "fact-finding" report to the CJI on May 4.
According to people in the know, the CJI informally shared the receipt of the report with senior Supreme Court judges on May 5. The CJI told a few SC judges (on May 5) that he was examining the committee's report and would take a final call as it was his "prerogative". It might be mentioned here that as per the in-house procedure, it is the CJI's prerogative to take a final call on such a committee report.
People quoted above added that the CJI followed the in-house procedure which says that in case the committee finds credence in accusations against the High Court Judge, then the CJI should advise him to either resign or seek voluntary retirement. Accordingly, CJI Khanna wrote to Justice Varma who responded on May 6.
It is reliably believed that Varma refused to step down following which the next step (according to the in-house procedure) is to forward the committee report to the President.
The in-house procedure reads "in a case the judge expresses his unwillingness to resign or seek voluntary retirement, the chief justice of the concerned High Court should be advised by the CJI not to allocate any judicial work to the judge concerned and the President of India and the Prime Minister shall be intimated that this has been done because allegations against the judge had been found by the committee to be so serious as to warrant the initiation of proceedings for removal and the copy of the report of the committee may be enclosed".
#Operation Sindoor
Live Updates| From Sindoor to showdown? Track Indo-Pak conflict as it unfolds
India hits Lahore's Air Defence Radars in proportionate response
Pakistan tried to hit military targets in these 15 Indian cities, New Delhi thwarts strikes
According to people in the know, the three-judge committee found credible evidence which corroborated the accusations against Justice Varma. The committee submitted its "fact-finding" report to the CJI on May 4.
According to people in the know, the CJI informally shared the receipt of the report with senior Supreme Court judges on May 5. The CJI told a few SC judges (on May 5) that he was examining the committee's report and would take a final call as it was his "prerogative". It might be mentioned here that as per the in-house procedure, it is the CJI's prerogative to take a final call on such a committee report.
People quoted above added that the CJI followed the in-house procedure which says that in case the committee finds credence in accusations against the High Court Judge, then the CJI should advise him to either resign or seek voluntary retirement. Accordingly, CJI Khanna wrote to Justice Varma who responded on May 6.
It is reliably believed that Varma refused to step down following which the next step (according to the in-house procedure) is to forward the committee report to the President.
The in-house procedure reads "in a case the judge expresses his unwillingness to resign or seek voluntary retirement, the chief justice of the concerned High Court should be advised by the CJI not to allocate any judicial work to the judge concerned and the President of India and the Prime Minister shall be intimated that this has been done because allegations against the judge had been found by the committee to be so serious as to warrant the initiation of proceedings for removal and the copy of the report of the committee may be enclosed".
