'Have decorum, you are referring to learned judge': SC objects to lawyer addressing Justice Varma without honorific

The court objected to Nedumpara addressing the judge as only “Varma.” “Is he your friend? He is still Justice Verma. How do you address him? Have some decorum. You are referring to a learned judge. He is still a judge of the court,” the SC said.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday objected to a lawyer referring to Allahabad High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma, indicted in a cash haul case, by taking his last name only without honorific.

Justice Varma faced removal proceedings over the discovery of cash piles in a fire incident in March at his official residence. Following the controversy, he was transferred from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court.

On Monday, advocate Mathews J Nedumpara mentioned Justice Varma's petition before a bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran.

He asked the bench to urgently list his plea seeking an FIR against Justice Varma. 

Accused judge referred as only "Varma"

While making submissions on his matter, Nedumpara referred to the accused judge as “Varma.”

The bench told the lawyer that Justice Varma is still a judge of a high court and he has to be addressed as a “Justice.” 

“This is the third writ petition,” Nedumpara said.

“You want it to be dismissed right now?," the bench asked him.

FIR insisted

The lawyer insisted that the FIR should be registered in the matter, and now Varma seems to be asking for just that. “There has to be an FIR, an investigation,” Nedumpara said. 

The court objected to Nedumpara addressing the judge as only “Varma.”

"Have some decorum..."

“Is he your friend? He is still Justice Verma. How do you address him? Have some decorum. You are referring to a learned judge. He is still a judge of the court,” it said. 

The lawyer urged the bench to list the matter.

Plea by Justice Varma

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta also said Justice Varma should be addressed appropriately. 

The plea filed by Nedumpara sought directions to the Delhi Police to register an FIR against Justice Varma and investigate the cash recovery.

Justice Varma himself had filed a plea the Supreme Court against the validity of actions initiated against him, which also includes a recommendation for his removal.

On March 22, 2025, the then CJI Sanjiv Khanna had set up the committee headed by Justice Sheel Nagu, Chief Justice of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, and comprising Justice G. S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, and Justice Anu Sivaraman, judge of the High Court of Karnataka.

The plea by Justice Varma said the invocation of the in-house procedure was improper and invalid, since it was done in the absence of any formal complaint against the petitioner.

He sought a declaration that the recommendation by the then CJI through letter of May 08, 2025 to the President and the Prime Minister for initiation of his removal as a High Court Judge is unconstitutional and ultra vires.