A House panel constituted by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla has found former Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma responsible for failing to satisfactorily explain the presence, source and ownership of a large quantity of cash found at his official residence.

The committee’s report was tabled in Parliament on Wednesday. It examined the circumstances surrounding the discovery of burnt currency notes at Justice Varma’s residence at 30, Tughlak Crescent, New Delhi.

A fire broke out at the official residence on the night of March 14, 2025. Firefighters who reached the spot allegedly found large quantities of burnt ₹500 currency notes in a storeroom.

The panel concluded that Justice Varma failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the presence of the cash. It also found his written response dated March 22, 2025, unsatisfactory.

According to the report, Justice Varma’s response lacked “candour, transparency and institutional responsibility.”

The committee also criticised the manner in which authorities handled the evidence after the cash was discovered.

It said officials failed to properly secure and preserve material evidence and allowed the condition of the storeroom to be disturbed before it could be lawfully sealed and inspected.

The report further said the subsequent disappearance or non-availability of the currency notes remained unexplained.

The panel attributed the loss of material evidence to the failure to preserve it properly and to the disturbance of the storeroom by staff attached to the premises.

However, the committee clarified that it found no proof that Justice Varma personally removed the cash.

The controversy surrounding the cash discovery led Parliament to initiate removal proceedings against Justice Varma. He has since resigned from the judiciary, making the removal proceedings against him effectively infructuous.

The committee’s findings have nevertheless concluded that Justice Varma failed to satisfactorily account for the cash found at his official residence, while also flagging serious lapses in the preservation and handling of the evidence.