<p class="bodytext">Justice Yashwant Varma’s resignation as a judge from the Allahabad High Court last week has made impeachment proceedings against him in parliament infructuous. But important questions around the events that led to the investigation against him remain unanswered. Varma has also formally withdrawn from the proceedings before an inquiry committee constituted by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to examine the charges against him. While he tendered his resignation to the President, in a letter to the committee, he said “a fair inquiry” was not being conducted. </p>.<p class="bodytext">A large stash of unaccounted cash was found, in a burnt state, at Varma’s residence in New Delhi last year, when he was a judge at the Delhi High Court. It is still unknown whose cash it was. An in-house committee constituted by then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna reported that the cash could not have been placed in the storeroom at the residence without the tacit or active consent of Justice Varma or his family members. The CJI gave Varma the option to resign from office, but Varma refused; Khanna then wrote to the Prime Minister recommending the judge’s removal from office. The implications of the incident are not limited to the reputation of a judge. Varma's statements regarding the incident have been unconvincing, and he has shifted positions. Getting to the truth of the charges is important for the stature and credibility of the judiciary.</p>.'Should have done it earlier': Allahabad HC Bar Association President welcomes Justice Varma's resignation .<p class="bodytext">The key questions are: Whose cash was found at the judge’s residence? What do the investigation's findings say about the source? If Varma’s adversaries planted the money, as the judge claimed, why is he not seeking a probe to identify them? Considering that he is an ordinary citizen now, with no immunity derived from his office, he needs to be questioned on the matter. The Supreme Court should take the initiative on this interrogation because the credibility, accountability, and transparency of the judiciary are involved. No judge has been impeached in the country, though at least four others have faced impeachment proceedings. Since no impeachment move has reached its logical end, this may be the time to re-examine the effectiveness of the existing mechanism. Resignation should not provide an escape route for the judges. There is greater focus now than ever on the independence of the judiciary and the conduct of judges. The nation has the right to answers, as an erosion of public trust in the judiciary risks weakening democracy.</p>
<p class="bodytext">Justice Yashwant Varma’s resignation as a judge from the Allahabad High Court last week has made impeachment proceedings against him in parliament infructuous. But important questions around the events that led to the investigation against him remain unanswered. Varma has also formally withdrawn from the proceedings before an inquiry committee constituted by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla to examine the charges against him. While he tendered his resignation to the President, in a letter to the committee, he said “a fair inquiry” was not being conducted. </p>.<p class="bodytext">A large stash of unaccounted cash was found, in a burnt state, at Varma’s residence in New Delhi last year, when he was a judge at the Delhi High Court. It is still unknown whose cash it was. An in-house committee constituted by then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna reported that the cash could not have been placed in the storeroom at the residence without the tacit or active consent of Justice Varma or his family members. The CJI gave Varma the option to resign from office, but Varma refused; Khanna then wrote to the Prime Minister recommending the judge’s removal from office. The implications of the incident are not limited to the reputation of a judge. Varma's statements regarding the incident have been unconvincing, and he has shifted positions. Getting to the truth of the charges is important for the stature and credibility of the judiciary.</p>.'Should have done it earlier': Allahabad HC Bar Association President welcomes Justice Varma's resignation .<p class="bodytext">The key questions are: Whose cash was found at the judge’s residence? What do the investigation's findings say about the source? If Varma’s adversaries planted the money, as the judge claimed, why is he not seeking a probe to identify them? Considering that he is an ordinary citizen now, with no immunity derived from his office, he needs to be questioned on the matter. The Supreme Court should take the initiative on this interrogation because the credibility, accountability, and transparency of the judiciary are involved. No judge has been impeached in the country, though at least four others have faced impeachment proceedings. Since no impeachment move has reached its logical end, this may be the time to re-examine the effectiveness of the existing mechanism. Resignation should not provide an escape route for the judges. There is greater focus now than ever on the independence of the judiciary and the conduct of judges. The nation has the right to answers, as an erosion of public trust in the judiciary risks weakening democracy.</p>
