The committee was set up by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, in August 2025. It examined allegations linked to the discovery of burnt and partly burnt currency notes at Justice Varma’s official residence in New Delhi.

The panel examined three main charges. It found all three proved.

• Unexplained currency was found at the official residence.
• Material evidence was not properly preserved after the cash was discovered.
• Justice Varma’s explanations about the cash were found to be evasive and misleading.

Panel says substantial cash was found at official residence

The committee said substantial quantities of Rs 500 notes were found in a storeroom at Justice Varma’s official residence after a fire on March 14 and 15, 2025.

Witnesses described the currency as burnt, partly burnt, wet and scattered notes. The committee said photographs and other electronic material also supported accounts that cash was present at the site.

Justice Varma had maintained that he did not have access to the storeroom because it was detached from the main residence. The committee rejected this explanation and held that the storeroom formed part of the official premises occupied by him, LiveLaw reported.

The panel also said Justice Varma did not provide a satisfactory explanation about the presence, source or ownership of the cash.

“What stands established is that substantial unexplained currency notes were found within the official premises occupied by the judge; that the storeroom formed part of those premises, and the judge failed to furnish a satisfactory explanation regarding its presence, source or ownership,” LiveLaw quoted the LS inquiry committee as saying.

Why the panel said the evidence was not preserved

The committee found that the currency notes and the condition of the storeroom were not properly preserved after the fire. It said the notes were not seized or inventoried and no proper inventory or panchnama was prepared at the time.

The storeroom was also not immediately sealed, according to the report. Cleaning took place after the first responders had left, and the currency later became unavailable.

The panel called the failure to preserve the material evidence a serious lapse. It also considered evidence about people connected with the household who were near the storeroom after the fire.

However, the committee did not say that it had direct proof that Justice Varma personally removed the currency. Instead, it held that he failed to ensure that material evidence at premises under his official charge was secured and preserved.

Panel finds Justice Varma’s explanations evasive

The committee also examined Justice Varma’s responses during the inquiry. It said his position changed over time. He initially denied the presence of unaccounted cash and later raised questions about the failure to seize the notes and the possibility that the cash had been planted.

The panel said these claims were not supported by evidence produced by Justice Varma. It found his explanations incomplete and misleading in effect.

The committee also noted that Justice Varma withdrew from the proceedings after the presenting side completed its evidence and witnesses had been cross-examined. The panel said his withdrawal by itself did not prove the charge, but considered it along with his failure to produce evidence supporting his claims.

How the Yashwant Varma cash row began

The controversy began after a fire broke out at Justice Varma’s official residence in Lutyens’ Delhi on March 14, 2025. Fire officials responding to the incident reported finding burnt and partly burnt currency notes at the premises.

Justice Varma was not at the residence when the fire broke out. The controversy led to an internal inquiry by the judiciary and later to proceedings under the Judges (Inquiry) Act. He was transferred to the Allahabad High Court and took the oath there on April 5, 2025.

Justice Yashwant Varma later resigned

Justice Varma later resigned as a judge in April 2026 while the parliamentary proceedings were continuing.  

The inquiry committee, headed by Supreme Court Justice Aravind Kumar, submitted its report to Speaker Om Birla in May 2026. The report was later tabled in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday.

What the report means

The committee’s findings establish the three charges for the statutory inquiry. The panel also made clear that its finding did not amount to a criminal finding that Justice Varma personally owned the currency.