SC Rejects Justice Varma’s Challenge to Unilateral Inquiry Panel

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to grant relief to Justice Yashwant Varma, who had challenged the unilateral formation of an inquiry panel by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to examine allegations of burnt currency found on his residential premises in March last year. A Bench headed by Justice Dipankar Datta said the petition filed anonymously as 'X' lacked merit. The court noted there was no procedural irregularity in the three-member panel constituted under the Judges (Inquiry) Act on August 12, 2025: Justice Aravind Kumar, Chief Justice M.M. Shrivastava of the Madras High Court, and senior advocate Vasudeva Acharya. The committee’s report would be placed before Parliament for MPs to decide on removal.

Varma argued that the panel's unilateral formation violated Section 3(2) of the 1968 Act and his equal protection rights, even though notices of motion for removal were given in both Houses on the same day. The government, Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha Secretariats, through Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, contended there was no right to joint formation and that the court's role ends with the panel's inquiry, with Parliament retaining final say.

The court emphasised that the panel was formed following a deliberate process; the panel’s report would be presented to Parliament, where MPs from both Houses would debate and decide on the possible removal. The court's decision does not necessarily address the merits of the underlying allegations but confirms procedural validity of the inquiry arrangement.

Analysts say the ruling reinforces parliamentary oversight over judicial accountability, while maintaining the independence of the inquiry process. For Justice Varma, the decision marks a procedural setback; for supporters of Parliament's oversight, it upholds the constitutional balance, ensuring due process while deferring ultimate judgment to elected representatives.

#JusticeVarmaCase #JudiciaryInParliament #SCInquiryPanel