New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain an early hearing request for a petition seeking an FIR against Justice Yashwant Verma of the Allahabad High Court, in connection with the cash recovery case at his official residence.
The bench, headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud (Note: If the CJI is BR Gavai as per your reference, use Chief Justice B.R. Gavai) and Justice K. Vinod Chandran, rebuked lawyer Mathews Nedumpara for showing a lack of decorum while referring to the sitting judge simply as “Verma”.
Read Also: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia to Retire from Supreme Court in August 2025 – Know More About Him
SC Pulls Up Lawyer: “Have Some Dignity”
During the brief exchange, Nedumpara urged the court to list his third petition for urgent hearing, saying the matter warranted prompt judicial attention. But the Chief Justice declined, stating that the matter would be listed at an appropriate time.
When the lawyer repeatedly pressed the issue, referring to the judge as “Verma”, the bench took strong exception.
“Is he your friend? He is still Justice Verma. How are you calling him? Have some decorum. He is a judge,” said Chief Justice Gavai, sternly reminding the advocate of courtroom etiquette.
“Don’t Order the Court” – SC Warns Nedumpara
Despite the bench’s reluctance to expedite the hearing, Nedumpara continued to argue, stating:
“I don’t think there is any greatness in him.”
This remark drew visible displeasure from the Chief Justice, who responded sharply:
“Please don’t order the court.”
Background: The Cash Recovery Controversy
The controversy began after a large amount of half-burnt cash was discovered at Justice Verma’s official residence during a fire incident on March 14, 2025, at around 11:35 PM.
Following this, a three-judge inquiry committee, headed by Punjab and Haryana High Court Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, was constituted. Over 10 days, the panel examined 55 witnesses and inspected the site.
The inquiry report concluded that Justice Verma and his family members had control—direct or indirect—over the store room where the cash was recovered. The committee termed the episode a “serious act of misconduct” and recommended his removal.
Recommendation for Impeachment
Based on the findings, former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna recommended initiating impeachment proceedings against Justice Verma. A letter was sent to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, backing the committee’s findings.
In response, Justice Verma filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging both the inquiry report and the recommendation for impeachment dated May 8, 2025.
What Happens Next?
Although the Supreme Court refused an early hearing in Nedumpara’s petition for an FIR, the larger legal battle involving Justice Verma’s challenge to the inquiry report and impeachment recommendation remains pending.
As the controversy continues to unfold, the case underscores the delicate balance between judicial accountability and institutional decorum—with the Supreme Court signaling clearly that respect for judicial office must be maintained, even amid serious allegations.
