Plea in SC for FIR against Justice Varma following in-house probe report

A writ petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against , after an in-house judicial inquiry reportedly confirmed allegations of illicit cash being discovered at his official premises, as per a report in LiveLaw.

The petition has been filed by advocate Mathews Nedumpara along with three others. This marks a renewed legal effort following an earlier petition in March, in which Nedumpara had challenged the in-house inquiry being conducted by a panel of three judges. That earlier plea also called for a regular criminal investigation.

At the time, the Supreme Court declined to entertain the petition, calling it premature. The bench dismissed the matter with the observation: "At this stage, it will not be appropriate to entertain this writ petition."

Now, with the in-house inquiry concluded and its report submitted to the chief justice of India (CJI), the petitioners have returned to the apex court. They argue that the report has found the allegations against Justice Varma to be prima facie true and that the CJI has forwarded the findings to the President and the prime minister.

In light of these developments, the petitioners are pressing for a formal criminal investigation. They contend that continuing inaction would undermine the seriousness of the allegations and the integrity of the judiciary.

A key argument in the petition challenges the legal precedent set in the K. Veeraswami judgment, which stipulates that no FIR can be registered against a sitting judge without the prior approval of the CJI. The petitioners contend that this requirement runs counter to established legal principles and deserves reconsideration.

Calling the matter “an open and shut case”, the petition alleges that Justice Varma amassed black money by “selling justice”. Even if one were to accept the judge's own explanation, the petition argues, serious questions remain — particularly why no FIR has been filed so far. “Filing an FIR even belatedly is absolutely necessary to enable the police to investigate the conspiracy aspect,” the petition states.

The petitioners assert that impeachment alone is insufficient. While removal from office is a civil consequence, they argue, it must be supplemented by penal proceedings under applicable laws. “When it is a judge, the defender of justice, who is himself the accused or culprit, then it is no ordinary offense. The gravity is far greater and so must be the punishment,” the petition reads.

They further emphasise the importance of public trust in the judiciary: “Probity in public life, which a judge is duty-bound to uphold, is uncompromisable. It is imperative that criminal law is set into motion, the matter is thoroughly investigated, and—most importantly—it must be determined who the bribe-givers and beneficiaries were, and in which case or judgment justice was purchased.”

The controversy stems from an incident on 22 March, when a was allegedly discovered during a firefighting operation in a storeroom at the out-house of Justice Varma’s official residence. At that time, he was serving as a judge of the Delhi High Court.

Following these revelations, then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna — who retired on Monday — constituted a committee to conduct an in-house inquiry into the matter. Subsequently, Justice Varma to the Allahabad High Court — his parent high court — and judicial responsibilities were withdrawn from him per the CJI’s directive.