Lok Sabha Speaker Appoints Lawyer to Assist Panel Probing Justice Varma Graft Case

Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla has appointed advocate Karan Umesh Salvi as a legal consultant to support the judges' inquiry committee investigating corruption charges against Delhi High Court Justice Yashwant Varma, announced on October 22, 2025. The three-member panel, established under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, comprises Supreme Court Justice Aravind Kumar, Madras High Court Chief Justice Madan Mohan Srivastav, and senior advocate BV Acharya. Salvi's role involves assisting with legal research, coordinating proceedings, and draughting the final report, which will be submitted to the Lok Sabha for potential impeachment recommendations. This development follows a motion adopted in the Lok Sabha on August 12, initiating the rare impeachment process against a sitting high court judge.

The inquiry stems from a March 2025 fire at Justice Varma's official residence in New Delhi, where firefighters discovered several burnt sacks containing large sums of cash in the outhouse. The incident, which occurred while Varma served as a Delhi High Court judge, prompted his immediate repatriation to the Allahabad High Court. An in-house investigation ordered by Supreme Court Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna subsequently indicted Varma for serious misconduct, citing violations of judicial ethics and potential corruption. The cash discovery raised questions about the source and storage of the funds, leading to widespread calls for accountability. Under Article 124(4) of the Indian Constitution, impeachment requires a motion supported by a majority in Parliament, followed by a committee probe confirming misbehaviour or incapacity.

Salvi's appointment builds on the committee's existing resources, following the addition last month of two junior lawyers, Rohan Singh and Sameeksha Dua, as additional consultants. This bolsters the panel's capacity to sift through evidence, including forensic reports on the recovered currency and witness testimonies, amid tight confidentiality protocols. The Judges (Inquiry) Act mandates that the committee's findings form the basis for parliamentary action, with impeachment needing a two-thirds majority in both houses for removal. Legal experts note that such probes are infrequent—only three judges have faced impeachment motions in India's history, none successful—highlighting the gravity of the case and its implications for judicial integrity.

Also Read: Israel Receives Additional Hostage Bodies From Gaza Amid Ceasefire Progress

As the investigation unfolds, the proceedings underscore ongoing debates about transparency in the judiciary, particularly regarding in-house resolutions versus public scrutiny. The Supreme Court's initial handling drew criticism from bar associations for lacking rigour, prompting the parliamentary intervention. With the report expected within months, outcomes could range from exoneration to formal impeachment charges, potentially reshaping oversight mechanisms. Stakeholders, including the Bar Council of India, await clarity, emphasising that upholding public trust remains paramount in safeguarding the third pillar of democracy.

Also Read: Musk Calls Acting NASA Head “Sean Dummy” Over Starship Setbacks