Judge Cash Row: With what evidence did the panel of judges accept the fact that cash was found at Justice Verma’s house? Know through questions and answers

Who is Justice Verma and what is the case against him? How did the investigation panel investigate this matter? What questions were answered and what did the investigating judges find in response to these questions?

ustice Yashwant Verma case. – Photo: ANI

Who is Justice Verma and what is the case against him? How did the investigation panel investigate this matter? What questions were answered and what did the investigating judges find in response to these questions?

In March this year, pictures of burnt notes were found in the house of the then Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Verma in New Delhi. After this, the Supreme Court took cognizance of the matter and constituted a three-member panel for investigation, which submitted the report to the then Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna after 10 days of investigation. Now a copy of this report is going viral. At the end of it, it is written that the allegations against Justice Yashwant Verma are so serious that proceedings can be initiated to remove the judge.

In such a situation, it is important to know who is Justice Verma and what is the case against him? How did the investigation panel investigate this matter? What questions were answered and what did the investigating judges find in response to these?

Who is Justice Yashwant Verma?
56-year-old Justice Yashwant Verma was appointed a judge of the Delhi High Court in October 2021. According to the Delhi High Court website, Justice Yashwant Verma enrolled as a lawyer on 8 August 1992. On 13 October 2014, he was appointed an additional judge of the Allahabad High Court. On 1 February 2016, Justice Verma became a permanent judge. On 11 October 2021, Justice Verma reached the Delhi High Court.

On 23 March, burnt notes of Rs 500 each were found in a garbage dump near Justice Verma’s official bungalow. In this case, Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal had said that he would say something on this only after the report of the three-member Supreme Court inquiry committee comes. On 24 March, Justice Verma was relieved of his judicial responsibilities until further orders.

What are the facts in the report of the panel of judges?

The then Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna constituted a panel on 22 March to investigate the cash scandal related to Justice Verma. The panel included Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of Punjab-Haryana High Court, Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia of Himachal Pradesh High Court and Judge Anu Shivraman of Karnataka High Court. This panel put forward answers to many questions through investigation. Amar Ujala has tried to explain the investigation of the entire case to the readers through questions and answers on the basis of this report.

Question 1: How many days did the investigation last, how many witnesses were questioned?
The panel of judges investigated for 10 days. 55 witnesses were questioned. The panel members also visited the place where the fire broke out at Justice Verma’s house. The evidence and witness statements were sent to Justice Verma following the principle of natural justice.

Question-2: What is in the investigation report on the allegation of burnt notes being found at the judge’s house?

Among the people related to the case questioned by the panel of judges – policemen, firemen, staff posted at Justice Verma’s house, guards, etc., at least 10 witnesses said that they saw many burnt and half-burnt notes. One witness even said that…

After this, the panel came to the conclusion that burnt currency notes were found in the store room of Justice Verma’s residence. The judges wrote in the report that the committee has been confirmed through the statements of eyewitnesses (police and firemen) and electronic evidence collected by them from the store room itself, such as photos and videos, that the police and firemen saw and recovered burnt currency notes from the store room located in the judge’s house.

The panel said that after the fact of burnt currency was confirmed, it was the responsibility of Justice Verma to defend himself by denying the fact. But Justice Verma could not fulfill his responsibility.

Question-3: Was the store room in the premises of the judge’s house?
The panel said that it is already established that Justice Verma and his family members had active control over the entry and exit of the store room and this store room was also kept under complete surveillance. No outsider could enter it without permission. Therefore, the objection that the store room was at some distance from the main premises of the house is meaningless in the case.

Question-4: What did Justice Verma say about the presence of cash in the store room?
The panel of judges said that after investigation, the fact of finding burnt notes in the store room had been established. It was the responsibility of Justice Verma to give a correct explanation about where the cash/money mentioned in this store room came from. But he not only failed in this, but he kept denying the allegations and kept talking about conspiracy in the case.

The panel said, “In the absence of any credible explanation from Justice Verma or any member of his family or any other witness, this committee is unable to arrive at any other conclusion. The committee is compelled to believe that Justice Verma himself breached the trust placed in him, as a huge amount of suspicious cash was found in his store room. It does not matter much whether this cash was kept with his or his family members’ tacit or explicit consent or not, because this entire matter is a violation of the larger concept in which a person holding a high constitutional post is expected to protect public trust and property.”

Justice Verma: Justice Verma has only one way to avoid impeachment, know what is the process of removal from the post

Question-6: What is in the report on Justice Verma not presenting his defence?

The report has also raised questions about Justice Verma not presenting his defence and the side of calling this case a conspiracy. It states that Justice Verma or anyone from his house did not try to report the matter anywhere, nor did they try to immediately secure the footage captured in the CCTV cameras and use them in their defense. Not even when on March 17, 2025, he was told that there were photos and videos of burnt cash from his house. Therefore, the claims (of conspiracy) being made by him are completely unbelievable.

Question-7: What came out on the claims of the store room being open to all?

The report states that the statements of the security personnel are contrary to this, so the claim of the store room being open to all cannot be accepted. The security personnel told during interrogation that discipline was always maintained and none of them could enter the house without the permission of the family. Regarding this, two CRPF jawans posted on duty told that when the fire broke out, the door of the store room was locked and they had helped in breaking the door. The report states that this proves that the door was kept locked and safe at all times. Especially when Justice Verma and his wife went out on vacation.

The investigation panel said that the store room in Justice Verma’s residence was constantly monitored by CCTV cameras. In such a situation, it is also not possible that someone else could keep cash there, but Justice Verma said that no data was found in the hard disk of the CCTV. Justice Verma said that if the cameras were not working, then it was not his fault. However, the investigation committee expressed doubt on his argument.

Question-8: What did Justice Verma’s personal staff say on these allegations?

Some people from Justice Verma’s personal staff said that the store room was not kept locked habitually. But none of them had gone inside that room. Many others said that they always saw the store room door locked.

Question-9: Was the evidence collected from the judge’s house confirmed?
The panel said that electronic evidence such as video recordings and photographs are also confirming the statements of eyewitnesses. The authenticity of the electronic evidence has also been confirmed by the Chandigarh-based forensic lab. In an alleged video of burning notes at Justice Verma’s house which went viral and which was later uploaded by the Supreme Court, a person looks at the burnt notes and says – Mahatma Gandhi is on fire. According to the report, this voice was of Delhi Fire Department’s station officer Manoj Mehlawat, who is witness number-6 in the case. Mehlawat himself has confirmed such a comment about these notes.

Question-10: What is the proposal at the end of the investigation committee’s report?
At the end of this 64-page report, it has been said that the investigation has proved that misconduct has taken place, which is enough to demand his removal from the post. The report said, ‘When the government allots a residence to a government official, it is the responsibility of the person living in it to keep the residential premises free from things that create suspicion in the eyes of the general public.’