THE Supreme Court told Justice Yashwant Varma on Wednesday that his conduct did not inspire confidence and asked why he chose to move the apex court after an in-house committee found him guilty of misconduct in the cash discovery row. The top court was hearing Justice Varma’s plea seeking invalidation of a report by an in-house inquiry panel which found him guilty of misconduct in the cash discovery matter. The in-house inquiry panel report indicted Justice Yashwant Varma over the discovery of a huge cache of burnt cash from his official residence during his tenure as a Delhi High Court judge.

 

The plea does not reveal Justice Varma’s identity and is titled, “XXX v. The Union of India”. Posing sharp questions to the judge, the top court asked Justice Varma why he appeared before the in-house inquiry committee and did not challenge it then and there. It told Justice Varma that he should have come earlier to the apex court. A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A G Masih said the in-house process was put in place in 1999 and the Chief Justice of India (CJI) cannot be considered as a mere post office.

 

“The Chief Justice of India is not supposed to be a post office only. He has certain duties to the nation as the leader of the judiciary. If material comes to him regarding misconduct, he is only to inform the President and the Prime Minister. Nothing more.”Justice Datta remarked. “If on the basis of the material, it is found that misdemeanour is so serious calling for an action, he would be affirming earlier decisions of this court that CJI has the power to do so,” Justice Datta remarked orally. The top court reserved its order on Justice Varma’s petition challenging the in-house inquiry procedure and the CJI’s recommendation for his removal.