If found guilty, resignation or VRS … What is the option in front of Yashwant Verma, a sack of notes

New Delhi: Chief Justice (CJI) Sanjeev Khanna has formed a committee of 3 judges to investigate the allegations against Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Verma. This committee will conduct a deep investigation into a large amount of cash case found at Judge Verma’s house. In 2015, the Supreme Court made some rules for such investigation. According to these rules, this committee will conduct factual investigation into the allegations. Judge Verma will get a chance to join the investigation and present his/her case. The committee will report to the CJI whether there is any truth in the allegations or not, and if it is so serious that the process of removing the judge should be started. The Supreme Court gave a verdict in 2015. This decision stated that the investigation would be factual. This means that it will not be a formal judicial inquiry. In this, the help of witnesses will not be taken and the help of lawyers will not be taken. The judgment also states that the committee can decide its process on its own, but it has to follow the principles of natural justice. In easy language, the committee will have to work in a fair manner and give Judge Verma a full opportunity to present his/her side. It has also been told in the judgment what report the committee can give to CJI after investigation.

The judgment also states that a copy of the report will be given to the judge. If the committee does not find any truth in the allegations, the CJI will discontinue the complaint. If the committee feels that there is truth in the allegations and it is so serious that the process of removing the judge should be initiated, then what should CJI do? This has also been answered in the judgment. The CJI should advise the judge to resign or take voluntary retirement. If the judges are not ready to resign, CJI should advise the Chief Justice of the High Court not to give any judicial work to the judge.

President and Prime Minister should be informed

In addition, the President and Prime Minister of India should also be informed about this. They should be told that the allegations against the judge are so serious that the action to remove them can be initiated. A copy of the committee report should also be sent to them. If the committee feels that there is truth in the allegations, but it is not so serious that the action to remove the judge is initiated, then the CJI should call the judge and tell them about it. CJI can also say that the report should be kept on record.

Committee can say this

• There is no truth in the allegations.
• There is truth in the allegations and it is so serious that the action to remove the judge should be started.
• There is truth in the allegations, but it is not so serious that the action to remove the judge is started.

What happened in an in-house investigation?

Delhi High Court Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay had already investigated the case in-house. he/she found that four to five sacks were burnt cash at Judge Verma’s house. he/she had said that the matter should be investigated deeply. Now CJI Sanjeev Khanna has formed a three -judge committee to investigate the matter. This committee will conduct factual inquiry into the allegations and report to CJI. Based on this report, CJI will decide what to do next.