New Delhi, July 22, 2025 – In a historic move, the Indian Parliament has initiated impeachment proceedings against Justice Yashwant Varma, a sitting judge of the Allahabad High Court, marking a significant moment in the country’s judicial history. The motion, driven by allegations of misconduct following the discovery of unaccounted cash at his official residence, has garnered bipartisan support and sparked intense debate about judicial accountability and independence. If successful, this would be the first-ever impeachment of a High Court judge in independent India.

Background of the Controversy

The controversy erupted on March 14, 2025, when a fire broke out at Justice Varma’s official residence in Lutyens’ Delhi, where he was serving as a judge of the Delhi High Court. Firefighters reportedly discovered large quantities of burnt or partially burnt currency notes in a storeroom, raising serious questions about the source of the cash. The incident prompted then-Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna to constitute a three-member inquiry panel on March 22, comprising Justices Sheel Nagu, G.S. Sandhawalia, and Anu Sivaraman. The panel’s report, submitted on May 4, 2025, found the allegations credible, concluding that Justice Varma failed to provide a plausible explanation for the cash and that the misconduct was severe enough to warrant impeachment proceedings.

Justice Varma, who was transferred to the Allahabad High Court on April 5, 2025, following the incident, has denied the allegations, labeling them a conspiracy. He refused the Supreme Court’s recommendation to resign, prompting the government to move forward with impeachment. Varma has also challenged the inquiry panel’s findings in the Supreme Court, arguing that the process violated his rights as a constitutional functionary and lacked procedural fairness. He claims the committee failed to investigate key facts, such as the ownership and source of the cash, and did not provide him with a personal hearing or access to evidence like CCTV footage.

The Impeachment Process

The impeachment process, governed by Articles 124, 217, and 218 of the Indian Constitution and the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, is a rigorous mechanism designed to balance judicial independence with accountability. It requires a motion to be signed by at least 100 Lok Sabha MPs or 50 Rajya Sabha MPs and passed by a two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament, followed by a Presidential order for removal.

On July 21, 2025, impeachment proceedings were formally set in motion when 152 Lok Sabha MPs, including prominent leaders like Anurag Thakur, Ravi Shankar Prasad, Rahul Gandhi, Supriya Sule, and KC Venugopal, submitted a signed memorandum to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla. In the Rajya Sabha, over 50 MPs submitted a similar notice to Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar, who directed the secretary-general to initiate the process. The bipartisan support, spanning parties like the BJP, Congress, TDP, JDU, and CPM, underscores the gravity of the allegations.

Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju has been instrumental in building consensus, emphasizing that the issue transcends political divides. “This is not a political agenda but a unified stand of Parliament against corruption,” Rijiju said in an interview with News18. He confirmed that over 100 MPs had signed the motion by July 20, with the number growing to over 200 by the start of the Monsoon Session on July 21.

Legal and Political Dimensions

The impeachment motion has sparked debates about the legal process and its implications for judicial independence. Congress MP Vivek Tankha and senior lawyer Abhishek Singhvi have cautioned that the Supreme Court’s in-house inquiry report cannot substitute the statutory process mandated by the Judges (Inquiry) Act. They argue that a new three-member committee, comprising a Supreme Court judge, a High Court Chief Justice, and a distinguished jurist, must be formed to investigate the allegations afresh.

Former Law Minister Kapil Sibal, an independent Rajya Sabha MP, has criticized the government’s approach, warning that bypassing the Judges (Inquiry) Act could set a dangerous precedent for judicial independence. He also raised concerns about selective action, pointing to the lack of progress on an impeachment motion against Justice Shekhar Yadav, who faced allegations of communal remarks in 2024.

On the other hand, the government and its supporters view the move as a bold step to address corruption in the judiciary. Posts on X have described it as the executive asserting its authority over an “uncontrolled” judiciary, with some calling it a historic moment. However, these sentiments are inconclusive and reflect polarized opinions rather than established facts.

Historical Context

Impeachment of judges in India is rare, with only five attempts in the country’s history, none of which have resulted in removal. Notable cases include Justice V. Ramaswami (1993), whose impeachment failed due to Congress abstentions, and Justice Soumitra Sen, who resigned after the Rajya Sabha passed a removal motion. The current case against Justice Varma is unprecedented for a High Court judge, highlighting systemic challenges in judicial accountability.

Critics, including journalist Shishir Tripathi, argue that judges often resign to evade scrutiny, undermining public trust in the judiciary. The repeated failure to complete impeachment processes has fueled calls for stronger accountability mechanisms.

Current Status and Next Steps

As of July 22, 2025, the impeachment motion is under consideration in both Houses of Parliament. If admitted by the Speaker or Chairman, a three-member committee will likely be formed to investigate the charges, despite debates about whether the existing Supreme Court panel’s findings suffice. The committee’s report will determine whether the motion proceeds to a vote in Parliament.

Justice Varma’s Supreme Court petition, challenging the inquiry report and impeachment recommendation, adds complexity. He argues that the process was flawed and that only Parliament has the authority to remove a judge through due process. The court’s decision could influence the parliamentary proceedings.

Broader Implications

The case has ignited discussions about corruption in the judiciary and the delicate balance between accountability and independence. The bipartisan support for the motion signals a rare consensus, but concerns about procedural fairness and potential politicization persist. The outcome of this historic impeachment process will likely shape public perception of the judiciary and set a precedent for future cases.

For now, all eyes are on Parliament’s Monsoon Session, which runs until August 12, 2025. The nation awaits whether Justice Varma will face removal or if his legal challenge will alter the course of this unprecedented saga.

Stay tuned to Bharat Tone for updates on this developing story.