All three charges proved against Justice Yashwant Varma, says Parliament-appointed Inquiry Committee

NEW DELHI: A Parliament-appointed inquiry panel has found all three charges against Justice Yashwant Varma proved in connection with the “recovery of cash from a storeroom” at his official residence, according to its report tabled in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on Wednesday.

The panel said a substantial quantity of Rs 500 notes was found in the storeroom and that Justice Varma, who resigned as High Court Judge in April this year, could not give a satisfactory explanation about the source, ownership or presence of the cash.

The report also examined what happened to the storeroom after the cash was discovered. It said the room was disturbed before it could be properly sealed and inspected, affecting the preservation of evidence.

The panel noted that Justice Varma initially denied the allegations but later suggested different possibilities, including that the cash may have been planted or that there could have been a conspiracy involving others. However, the panel said no evidence was produced in support of these claims.

It also noted that relevant staff members were not examined as defence witnesses and that no FIR or formal complaint was lodged alleging that the cash had been planted or that evidence had been tampered with.

BIG BREAKING Lok Sabha probe panel finds Justice Yashwant Varma guilty in cash-at-home case.

SHOCKING REPORT –

Storeroom was not immediately sealed

Cleaning immediately took place after first responders had left

The currency later became unavailable

Justice Varma… pic.twitter.com/gaOJfLNkqs

— News Algebra (@NewsAlgebraIND) August 12, 2026

The panel said these circumstances supported drawing an adverse inference while considering Justice Varma’s defence. It concluded that his explanation was evasive, incomplete and misleading in effect and held that the conduct did not meet the standards of transparency, candour and institutional responsibility expected of a constitutional court judge.

The committee said the charges are threefold — firstly, discovery and possession of unexplained Indian currency notes within official premises; secondly, failure to preserve and causing interference with material evidence; and thirdly, furnishing evasive and misleading explanations.

The report follows a detailed inquiry in which the panel examined documentary and electronic material and recorded evidence from witnesses. The accompanying proceedings show that Justice Varma was given an opportunity to respond to the charges and present his defence.

“The statement of grounds accompanying the charges records the occurrence of fire, discovery of cash, location of the storeroom within the Government-allotted residence, the alleged conduct after the fire, and the explanation offered by the Judge,” the inquiry report said. The committed recorded its findings.

“Article I is proved. Substantial unexplained Rs 500 denomination currency notes were found in the storeroom situated within the official residential premises at 30, Tughlaq Crescent, New Delhi. The Judge failed to furnish a satisfactory explanation regarding the presence, source or ownership thereof,” it said.

“Article II is proved that material evidence was not secured or preserved; the evidentiary condition of the storeroom was disturbed before lawful sealing and inspection; and the later non-availability of the currency notes remains unexplained. The finding rests on failure to preserve, acquiescence in disturbance through the establishment attached to the premises, and resulting loss of material evidence, and not upon proof of personal physical removal by the Judge. Article III is proved,” it added.

The committee said that the explanation furnished by the Judge, particularly the reply dated March 22, 2025 and the subsequent stand taken, did not “exhibit the candour, transparency and institutional responsibility expected in the circumstances. It remained evasive and unsatisfactory when tested against the evidence of independent official witnesses and corroborative material”. (ANI)