The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a petition seeking an FIR and a court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe against former Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma in the controversial “cash-at-home” scandal.
“This is cheap publicity. We are not going to entertain it. Sorry,” the Bench led by Justice BR Gavai Narasimha remarked before dismissing the petition.
During the brief hearing, Justice Narasimha began by asking the petitioner – advocate Ghanshyam Upadhyay – to identify himself. “Who are you?” Justice Narasimha asked. Upadhyay responded by saying, “I am an advocate and party in person, Ghanshyam Upadhyaya.”
Upadhyay then argued that investigating agencies had failed to initiate criminal proceedings against Yashwant Varma despite receiving a detailed complaint from him.
He submitted that he had approached the Delhi Police, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on June 2 alleging commission of cognisable offences in the case. He said that despite the complaint, no FIR had been registered against Varma.
“The complaint disclosed commission of cognisable offences and the authorities have failed to initiate the mandatory criminal process envisaged under law,” the petitioner argued.
The petition named the Union of India, CBI, ED and the Delhi Police Commissioner as respondents.
Upadhyay had argued that Justice Varma’s resignation in April this year removed the legal shield available to sitting judges under the Supreme Court’s landmark 1991 judgment in K Veeraswami vs Union of India.
The ruling bars registration of an FIR against a sitting High Court or Supreme Court judge without prior permission from the CJI. According to the petitioner, that protection no longer applies since Varma has demitted office.
However, after hearing Upadhyay’s arguments, the court expressed strong disapproval of the plea.
Cash-At-Home Scandal
Justice Varma resigned from the Allahabad High Court in April this year amid impeachment proceedings linked to allegations that large quantities of burnt cash were discovered at his official residence in Delhi following a fire in March 2025. His resignation effectively brought the parliamentary removal process to an end.
The controversy had triggered an in-house judicial inquiry and a proposed impeachment motion backed by more than 140 Lok Sabha MPs.
Justice Varma has consistently denied wrongdoing. His resignation came days before a parliamentary inquiry committee was scheduled to begin hearings into the allegations.