Trial By Fire For Judicial Probity

Judicial integrity is under scrutiny after allegations of corruption against a judge of the Delhi High Court. Burnt cash allegedly found on the premises of Justice Yashwant Varma is roiling the bar and the civil society, putting the focus back on the fine balance between judicial independence and accountability. A three-judge panel is probing the case. Will the full truth emerge anytime soon?

- 

matter. A bench of the Supreme Court comprising justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan on March 28 refused to entertain a plea for filing an FIR. "The in-house inquiry is ongoing. If the report sees something wrong, FIR can be directed or matter can be referred to Parliament. Today is not the time to consider it," the bench observed.

The bench was referring to a Supreme Court-appointed three-member committee investigating the alleged 'cash burn', a phrase that has a completely different connotation in the business domain. As part of the inquiry, the in-house committee comprising Justice Sheel Nagu (Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court), Justice G S Sandhawalia (Chief Justice of Himachal Pradesh High Court) and Justice Anu Sivaraman (Karnataka High Court judge) recently visited Justice Varma's official bungalow at 30, Tughlak Crescent in Delhi.

In-house committee procedure The in-house procedure formulated by the Supreme Court in 1999 was specifically designed to handle allegations against judges without compromising on judicial independence. This framework was established following a similar case in 1995 involving the then Bombay High Court Chief Justice A M Bhattacharjee, who faced allegations of financial misconduct. The procedure allows for a structured yet confidential investigation into allegations of misconduct against judges. It operates on the principle that the judiciary should internally address accusations against its members without the immediate involvement of external investigative agencies.