Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, May 21: The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a petition seeking a judicial order to register a criminal case against sitting High Court judge, Justice Yashwant Varma, in whose official residence in Delhi half-burnt unaccounted cash was found after a blaze in March.
A Bench headed by Justices A S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan addressing petitioner-advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara, referred to a press statement issued by the Supreme Court on May 8, informing that the in-house inquiry report along with Justice Varma’s response to it had been had been forwarded to the President Droupadi Murmu and the Prime Minister Narendra Modi for suitable action and that the petitioners should first approach them.
“There was an in-house inquiry report. It has been forwarded to the President of India and the Prime Minister of India. So follow the basic rule. If you are seeking a writ of mandamus, you have to first make a representation to those authorities before which the issue is pending. Action has to be taken by the President and the Prime Minister,” Justice Oka told advocate Mathews J Nedumpara, who is one of the petitioners in the matter.
“The petitioner will have to seek redressal of their grievance by filing representation before the appropriate authorities rather than seek a writ of mandamus. We decline to entertain this writ petition. At this stage it is not necessary to look into the other prayers,” the Bench recorded in its order.
The petitioner had alleged that no First Information Report (FIR) had been registered, and criminal law was not set in motion after the discovery of the cash. “It is indisputable that the huge volumes of money that was burned and partly burned and clandestinely removed was nothing but bribe/corruption — a crime punishable under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Prevention of Corruption Act,” the petition had alleged.
The petition had highlighted a lack of official explanation as to why an FIR was not registered and criminal law not set into motion. “This would have meant the seizure of the currency notes, securing the crime location, arresting of suspects, etc.,” it had said.
Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna (now retired) had forwarded the final inquiry committee report into the incident to the President and the Prime Minister after Justice Varma, a High Court judge, had refused to voluntarily retire or resign.
Mr Nedumpara, who is one of the petitioners in the matter, had referred to a Constitution Bench decision in the K. Veeraswami vs. Union of India case, which had held that a criminal case against a constitutional court judge could be registered only after prior consultation with the Chief Justice of India.
The bench said it was not saying that he cannot approach the court. “You do not know the contents of the report. We also do not know the contents of that report. You make a representation calling upon them to take action. If they do not take action, then you can come here,” the bench said.
Nedumpara also said he was seeking reconsideration of the 1991 ruling in K Veeraswami Vs. Union of India, wherein it was held that prior approval of the Chief Justice of India was mandatory for registering a criminal case under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code against a sitting high court or Supreme Court judge. But the court said the prayer need not be considered now.
A committee comprising Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Justice G S Sandhawalia, Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, and Justice Anu Sivaraman, judge of the Karnataka High Court was set up on March 22 to look into the allegations of cash recovery after a fire broke out at former Delhi High Court judge Justice Varma’s residence. The panel found credence in the allegations.
