top of page
Search

🚹 SC To Hear Justice Varma's Cash Scandal Plea Today! đŸ’°âš–ïž

TL;DR: The Supreme Court of India is hearing a landmark petition today (July 28, 2025) by Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma, who challenges the in-house inquiry report that found him complicit in a massive cash‑at‑home scandal and questions the fairness of the removal recommendation by the then Chief Justice of India. He even filed the petition under the anonymised title “XXX”. đŸ’Œ

đŸ§” Full Story

SC bench takes up hot seat

🕛 On July 28, 2025, a two‑judge bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice A. G. Masih is hearing Justice Varma’s plea seeking quashing of the inquiry report and the former Chief Justice’s removal recommendation.

CJI recuses himself

Chief Justice B. R. Gavai stepped aside from the case due to prior involvement and internal discussions—adding to the controversy and public interest in judicial accountability.

Cash discovery & inquiry timeline

  • A fire broke out at Justice Varma’s Delhi residence on March 14, 2025, revealing sacks of burnt and half‑burnt cash in a storeroom.

  • A three‑judge in‑house panel later concluded the cash was under the judge’s control and recommended removal based on misconduct.

Judge adopts cloak of anonymity

In an unusual move, Justice Varma filed his writ petition as “XXX vs Union of India” to maintain privacy in this high‑profile case—typically done in sensitive or minor cases.

Key legal objections raised

Justice Varma argues the in‑house process was prejudged, lacked statutory grounding, and violated natural justice. He alleges denial of personal hearing, refusal to examine exculpatory evidence, and reverse burden of proof.

Implications for judicial accountability

Should the SC rule in his favour, it won’t nullify Parliament’s power—but it may serve as political vindication, especially as the Madam Speaker readies impeachment motions in the Monsoon Session.

🧠 MediaFx People's Perspective

Straight from the everyday folks’ lens: this case shows how even judges must face public scrutiny, especially when massive unaccounted cash is involved. The system must work for the people, not shield powerful individuals. From the people’s angle, transparency is key. If there’s no fair probe, how can anyone believe the courts?

Justice Varma’s fight questions whether the in‑house judgement system supports working‑class democracy—or benefits the elite’s self‑interest. The SC’s handling today will signal if our legal system stays accountable to the people—or stays lost in secrecy.

📌 Why Youth Should Care

  • It's rare for a sitting High Court judge to file against the Supreme Court’s own process—unheard-of boldness!

  • Raises questions about fair hearing and separation of powers.

  • Impacts public trust in judicial independence and fairness.

  • A precedent for accountability—important for all, especially the less privileged.

Ask in comments:⁉ Do you think the judiciary should have the power to internally recommend judge removal?đŸ€” Is the in‑house process fair? Should Parliament be the only body to decide?

bottom of page