Shreya Gupta
The Allahabad High Court Bar Association (HCBA) has passed a resolution calling for impeachment proceedings against Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma. The resolution, adopted on March 24, 2025, also opposed the Supreme Court Collegium’s proposal to transfer Justice Varma to the Allahabad High Court.
In protest, the lawyers decided to abstain from judicial work after lunch. The resolution stated that immediate steps should be taken for Justice Varma’s impeachment, arguing that the judiciary, including the High Court and Supreme Court, could no longer claim the moral high ground after this controversy.
The call for impeachment follows the alleged discovery of unaccounted cash at an outhouse of Justice Varma’s residence after a fire broke out there last week. While Justice Varma has denied the allegations, maintaining that he is being framed, the controversy has triggered serious accusations of corruption.
On March 22, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna initiated an in-house inquiry and appointed a three-member panel of High Court judges to examine the allegations. While the HCBA appreciated this step, it expressed concerns that judges should not investigate their peers, fearing a possible cover-up. The resolution also criticized the collegium system, arguing that no other country allows judges to judge or appoint other judges.
The HCBA strongly opposed the Supreme Court Collegium’s proposal to transfer Justice Varma to the Allahabad High Court, arguing that the court should not become a “dumping ground for corrupt and tainted judges.”
The Collegium had met on March 20 to discuss Justice Varma’s repatriation but had not released an official statement immediately. However, on March 24, it formally recommended his transfer, which the HCBA vowed to resist.
Additionally, the HCBA urged the CJI to permit the filing of a First Information Report (FIR) against Justice Varma and called for a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Enforcement Directorate (ED), and other agencies.
The resolution emphasized that this was not merely a criminal trial but a case that had shaken public faith in the judiciary, arguing that Justice Varma’s continued presence in the judiciary was dangerous for democracy. It also pointed out that judicial immunity applies only to acts performed in a professional capacity, and thus, Justice Varma should not be shielded from investigation.
The HCBA further called for a review of all judgments delivered by Justice Varma and demanded a reform of the collegium system. It criticized the judicial appointment process as lacking transparency and being restricted to individuals from influential legal backgrounds. The resolution emphasized the need for a more inclusive and transparent selection process to restore public trust in the judiciary.
Click here to read the Resolution
Instagram: Click here
LinkedIn: Click here
For Collaboration and Business: info.desikaanoon@gmail.com