Hearing in the Supreme Court on the petition of Yashwant Verma.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday started hearing a petition filed by Justice Yashwant Verma of Allahabad High Court. Justice Yashwant Verma has challenged the findings of the Internal Judicial Investigation, in which he was convicted of misconduct for receiving a noted note at his official residence in Delhi. Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice A.G. Christ’s bench raised sharp questions on the outline of the petition and the behavior of the judge.
The petition has demanded the findings of the internal panel and the recommendation of the recommendation of the then Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna to remove Justice Verma. The incident took place from March 14-15, 2024, when the Delhi Police found a half-up cash inside the official bungalow of the judge.
Supreme Court questioned the ignoring the investigation report in the petition
On behalf of Justice Verma, senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued that his client was convicted without any proper procedure and sensitive documents were leaked in the media before any formal parliamentary process started. Sibal told the court, “The report was made public and the judge was declared guilty before time.”
However, a bench of the Supreme Court strongly objected to this lapse in the petition. Justice Dutta said, “You should have filed an internal investigation report with your petition. This petition should not have been filed in this way.” The bench also questioned why Justice Verma did not raise objections first or participated in the proceedings of the Internal Committee. The court said, “You are a constitutional authority. Why didn’t you appear before the committee? You cannot claim ignorance.”
‘Why is it troublesome to send a report to the President?
During the hearing, the court asked Sibal where the investigation report was sent. When Sibal replied that the report has been sent to the President of India, the court further asked: “Why do you think it is public to send a report to the President?” The bench clarified that submitting the report to the President and the Council of Ministers is not the same as “influencing” Parliament to initiate impeachment proceedings by the Chief Justice. The court insisted that this communication was not naturally unconstitutional or prejudicial.
‘Politization of procedure, judge suffering from prejudice’: Sibal
Kapil Sibal, citing public publication, online discussion and immature conclusions drawn by the media, said that the entire process has been politicized. He argued that there should be no discussion on the conduct of a judge as per Article 124 (5) and the previous decisions of the Constitution Bench until a formal impeachment motion is introduced in Parliament.
Next hearing on Wednesday
After hearing the initial arguments, the bench postponed the hearing of the case. Now the hearing will start again on Wednesday (July 30, 2025), when the court will investigate whether the procedures adopted in the investigation have violated the constitutional security measures.
Latest india news
