The two-volume report finds all three charges proved but says there is no direct evidence that Varma personally removed the cash
A Lok Sabha inquiry committee has found all three charges against former Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Varma proved in the cash-at-home case, concluding that he failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the substantial quantity of currency found at his official residence.
The two-volume report was tabled in Parliament on Wednesday, detailing the committee’s findings on the discovery of burnt, half-burnt and wet ₹500 notes at Varma’s official residence in New Delhi following a fire in March 2025.
Panel finds Varma’s explanation unsatisfactory
The committee said Varma failed to satisfactorily explain the presence, source or ownership of the cash found in a storeroom at his official residence at 30, Tughlak Crescent.
According to the report, Varma’s response was “evasive, incomplete and misleading in effect”. The panel said his explanation did not adequately address the currency seen by firefighters and police personnel or establish what steps were taken to preserve the site and secure the evidence.
The committee, however, made an important distinction: its finding does not amount to a determination that Varma personally owned the currency in a criminal sense. It said substantial unexplained currency was found within the official premises occupied by him and that he failed to satisfactorily explain its presence, source or ownership.
Three charges against former judge
The inquiry panel examined three broad charges.
The first concerned the discovery and possession of unexplained currency at Varma’s official residence. The second related to the failure to preserve material evidence after the cash was discovered. The third concerned the explanations given by Varma regarding the cash.
The committee concluded that all three Articles of Charge were proved.
The panel also found that Varma had effective control over the storeroom, rejecting his argument that it was detached from the residence and inaccessible to him.
Cash evidence was not properly preserved
The committee criticised the handling of the scene after the fire.
It said the currency was not properly seized, inventoried or documented, while the storeroom was not immediately sealed. Cleaning took place after the first responders had left, and the currency subsequently became unavailable.
The panel described the failure to preserve the evidence as a material lapse but said this did not negate the accounts of officials who had seen and identified the currency.
At the same time, the committee said it found no direct proof that Varma personally removed the cash. Instead, it held that he failed to ensure that material evidence was secured and preserved after becoming aware of the incident.
Varma had denied wrongdoing
Varma had consistently denied that the cash belonged to him or his family and had questioned how the currency came to be in the storeroom.
The latest parliamentary inquiry follows an earlier in-house inquiry constituted by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, which had concluded that Varma had “active or tacit control” over the storeroom where the cash was found.
The controversy erupted after a fire at Varma’s official residence on the night of March 14, 2025, when firefighters reportedly discovered large quantities of burnt currency in the storeroom.
Varma has resigned
Parliament had initiated removal proceedings against Varma following the controversy. He subsequently resigned as a judge in April 2026, meaning the removal proceedings have effectively become infructuous.
The parliamentary panel’s findings nevertheless put a formal institutional stamp on the allegations, with all three charges now recorded as proved by the inquiry committee.
For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.
