At House panel meet, questions on why no FIR after cash seizure at judge’s residence

Wait 5 sec.

Cash was found at the residence of Justice Varma in Delhi when a fire broke out there on March 14. Justice Varma was indicted by the in-house inquiry on May 8.From judges attending ideological meetings to the demand for FIR against Justice Yashwant Varma to judges not following code of conduct rules, the Parliamentary Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice discussed a wide range of issues at a meeting on Tuesday.Among the most asked questions by the committee members was why an FIR was not registered against Justice Yashwant Varma after allegations of cash being found at his official residence.Cash was found at the residence of Justice Varma in Delhi when a fire broke out there on March 14. Justice Varma was indicted by the in-house inquiry on May 8. The government has initiated the process for bringing an impeachment motion against Justice Varma during the upcoming Monsoon Session of Parliament.It is learnt that a member also suggested that the 1991 judgment in ‘K Veeraswami vs Union of India’ case should be relooked and if judges are involved in wrongdoings, they should face an FIR. The Department of Justice Secretary is learnt to have told the panel members that he will get back regarding the demand for an FIR against Justice Varma.The issue of Justice Shekhar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court against whom Rajya Sabha members have moved an impeachment notice also came up. One member wanted to know what action had been taken against Justice Yadav by the CJI.In December last year, Justice Yadav, a sitting judge of Allahabad High Court, had made questionable remarks on Muslim marriage practices and backed the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) while speaking at a VHP event. An impeachment notice was submitted by 54 Rajya Sabha MPs against Justice Yadav.At Tuesday’s meeting of the committee chaired by BJP MP Brij Lal, another member was said to have suggested that judges should have a cooling off period of five years after retirement during which they shouldn’t be allowed to take up any kind of job or work, or political assignments or contest elections.Story continues below this adAnother member also suggested an increase in the retirement age of judges and that they should get a better salary and pension.The agenda of Tuesday’s meeting was to discuss the code of conduct for judges of higher judiciary.Asad Rehman is with the national bureau of The Indian Express and covers politics and policy focusing on religious minorities in India. A journalist for over eight years, Rehman moved to this role after covering Uttar Pradesh for five years for The Indian Express. During his time in Uttar Pradesh, he covered politics, crime, health, and human rights among other issues. He did extensive ground reports and covered the protests against the new citizenship law during which many were killed in the state. During the Covid pandemic, he did extensive ground reporting on the migration of workers from the metropolitan cities to villages in Uttar Pradesh. He has also covered some landmark litigations, including the Babri Masjid-Ram temple case and the ongoing Gyanvapi-Kashi Vishwanath temple dispute. Prior to that, he worked on The Indian Express national desk for three years where he was a copy editor. Rehman studied at La Martiniere, Lucknow and then went on to do a bachelor's degree in History from Ramjas College, Delhi University. He also has a Masters degree from the AJK Mass Communication Research Centre, Jamia Millia Islamia. ... Read MoreStay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram© The Indian Express Pvt LtdTags:delhi high courtsupreme court