SC dismisses plea for SIT probe in Justice Varma cash case, calls it 'cheap publicity'

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a petition seeking a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe into the alleged recovery of burnt currency from the official residence of former Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Varma. The petition was filed by lawyer Ghanshyam Upadhyay, who argued that the criminal liability arising from the allegations survives the resignation of Justice Varma, and that his resignation does not shield him from prosecution.

Justice P.S. Narasimha, heading the bench, orally observed that the petition appeared to be a move for “cheap publicity”. The observation came during the hearing, where the court declined to entertain the plea.

The case stems from an incident in March last year, when a fire at Justice Varma's official residence led to the discovery of burnt currency notes. Following the incident, a three-member in-house committee comprising Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, Himachal Pradesh High Court Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, and Karnataka High Court Justice Anu Sivaraman was constituted to conduct a fact-finding inquiry.

The committee submitted its report to the then Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, in May 2025. Based on the report, the Chief Justice of India advised Justice Varma to resign or face impeachment proceedings. The report was also forwarded to the President of India and the Prime Minister, as per established procedure.

In August 2025, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla constituted a parliamentary committee to investigate the allegations against Justice Varma. However, Justice Varma tendered his resignation before the committee could submit its findings.

During the Supreme Court hearing, Upadhyay contended that the resignation does not extinguish criminal liability. He argued that the former judge can still be prosecuted for the alleged offences, and an independent SIT probe was necessary to determine the facts. The court, however, did not find merit in the plea and dismissed it.

The dismissal of the petition means that no further judicial direction has been given for an SIT probe in the matter. The earlier in-house committee report and the parliamentary committee's proceedings remain the primary official responses to the incident. The case highlights the constitutional mechanisms available for dealing with allegations against members of the higher judiciary.

Justice Varma's resignation in April 2026 came after months of intense scrutiny and political debate over the discovery of the currency notes. The Supreme Court's decision on Friday effectively closes this particular legal challenge, though the broader questions about accountability and transparency in the judiciary remain part of public discourse.

The article has been written with information available from court records and official statements. The petitioner's claims and the court's observations have been reported without endorsement or commentary, in keeping with journalistic standards of neutrality and accuracy.