The sensational episode of burnt cash found at Delhi High Court’s second senior-most judge, Justice Yashwant Varma’s residence, has brought back focus on the judiciary again. The inquiry is ongoing, and no conclusion should be drawn hastily. Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna has done the right thing to move with alacrity; he not only ordered an inquiry by three eminent judges of three high courts but also put the preliminary report submitted by Delhi HC Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyaya and the video of burnt cash on the Supreme Court’s website.
The report also has Justice Varma’s version in which he says he is a victim of a larger conspiracy. This report is in the public domain; anyone can access and read the report. This has killed many birds with one stone. First, Delhi is a hotbed of political rumours and gossip.
In the last few years, rumour-mongering has evolved into a fine art to finish anyone’s career and a reputation built over decades. Such rumours spread faster than one can imagine in the age defined by omnipresent social media. In this age, misinformation, disinformation, fake news, distorted and half-truths have been weaponised as a part of the political narrative. Transparency is the best tool to counter this nemesis. Rumours would have scaled Himalayan peaks if attempts had been made to suppress the report’s details.
Now, details are in the public domain, and anyone can draw their own conclusion based on the facts detailed in the report. Second, it has also given the public an opportunity to learn about Justice Yashwant Varma’s version. Judges are constrained by tradition. They speak only through their judgment and avoid speaking to the media and press directly. Ever since the news broke, nobody knew what story Justice Varma had to tell. Without his version, it was easy to paint him a villain and cast aspersions on his credentials.
I was talking to a senior and respected civil society member with vast knowledge about the judiciary. I was arguing with him that in this age of social media, when reputation is tarred in a few seconds, Justice Varma should speak, and if not him, then someone should tell his side of the story, as the matter was not related to his judicial functions. I was told he should not speak and let the investigation conclude. I argued that the time had changed, old-fashioned values have no place in a highly evolved world of communication, and by the time the investigation concludes, his hard-earned reputation will be over. He was not convinced. Though the report made public by the CJI also had Justice Varma’s version.
I am not passing judgment on the incident. Still, transparency and the law of natural justice demand that all sides get an opportunity to speak for themselves and that all versions be heard. That way, Justice Khanna did the right thing. Third, Justice Khanna’s act has killed the possibility of any mischief and manipulation in this case. Since the matter was related to the higher judiciary, he was right to take the initiative and keep the ball rolling; instead, some other organ of the state started meddling in the affair. From day one, in this case, the actions of senior officers of the police and fire department of Delhi are not above board.
Why was the Delhi High Court’s Chief Justice not informed about the matter immediately? Why did the police commissioner take sixteen hours to call him up and inform him about the case? Did he take the matter too lightly, or was he under some pressure? The fire department changed his statement. First, it was reported that burnt currency was found in the judge’s bungalow. Later, it was said he had never said cash had been recovered. Why did he change his statement? Why should it not be inferred that the operation cover-up began once the seriousness of the matter was discovered?
Let’s not forget that at the time of writing this, no FIR was lodged, which should have been the first action taken once the burnt currency was recovered from the spot. The incident happened at the residence of the high court’s judge but was unrelated to the judiciary or his judicial function. Lodging an FIR was the first and the natural step. It was not necessary to add Justice Varma’s name to the FIR unless some evidence was found linking him with the incident. If a murder or burglary happens at a judge’s residence, will the police lodge an FIR or not, or will they wait for permission from the chief justice or senior officers of the government?
It is also speculated that cash should be mentioned in the seizure report if it was indeed found. Where is that report? Without passing any judgment about the case or person involved, I am intrigued by the incident. I am constrained to look at the past. In the last few years, several mysterious and exceptional things related to the higher judiciary in Delhi have happened. In a first of its kind, four senior judges of the Supreme Court held a press conference and cried that democracy was in danger. This had never happened in the past.
It was accused that the Supreme Court roaster was deliberately designed to help the government of the day in many cases. Second, an incumbent chief justice was accused of sexual harassment by his own staff. It created a sensation, and the entire case was hushed up. After his retirement, the concerned judge found a seat in Parliament. Third, a former chief minister belonging to a north-eastern state died by suicide. His 60-page suicide note allegedly mentioned the names of two chief justices of India and many other politicians.
The matter never reached its logical conclusion, and no investigation ever happened to clear the names of Supreme Court judges whose names occurred in the note that gave wings to rumours and let them fly high. The judiciary, as an institution, in the last few years, like many other institutions, has been under tremendous pressure. There is a serious attempt to extort the independence of the judiciary, especially of constitutional courts, and make them committed to the executive; if that happens, the democratic structure will collapse, and democracy will be over.
In this context, it is far more important that CJI Khanna conducts a timebound investigation and the truth emerges. If Justice Varma is found guilty, the law should take its own course. But this incident should not be allowed to rob the independence of the judiciary.
The writer is Co-Founder, SatyaHindi.com, and author of Hindu Rashtra. He tweets at @ashutosh83B
