NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday declined to consider a plea for a direction to the police to register an FIR against Delhi High Court judge, Justice Yashwant Varma, saying in-house was inquiry on and all courses are open.
Justice Varma has been in the eyes of storm over alleged discovery of unaccounted money during the fire incident at his official residence here on the night of March 14-15.
SC Rejects Plea for FIR Against Justice Varma Amid Ongoing In-House Inquiry
Dealing with a PIL for FIR against him, a bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan said once in-house inquiry is complete, all courses are open, if required, the Chief Justice of India can direct the registration of the FIR.
"We have seen the prayer why should we go into this at this stage," the bench asked petitioner in person advocate Mathews J Nedumpara.
Justice Yashwant Varma Case: Supreme Court Says All Options Open Post-Inquiry
The court said since in-house inquiry is going on, it would not be appropriate at this stage to entertain this writ petition.
The petitioner said the investigation is not the job of the country and the common man keeps on asking why no FIR was registered on March 14, why money was not seized and why Delhi Fire Chief said no money was recovered.
The bench said there are already two or three judgements laying down the mechanism on the issue.
"So if you represent the common man somebody has to educate the command man," the bench said.
The petitioner said when there is a conflict between the judgment and the statute, the statute must prevail. He contended the Veeraswami judgment is against the Criminal Procedure Code.
He contended the three-member judges' committee was without any jurisdiction.
The court, however, declined to consider the plea.
"After in-house inquiry is over several options are open. If the report indicates that something is wrong. The Chief Justice of India can direct registration of an FIR. He can refer the matter to the Parliament (for impeachment). Today, it is not the day to go into this question (regarding registration of an FIR). The internal inquiry is in progress. Today, it is not a time to consider this,” the bench said.
The PIL was filed jointly by three lawyers Nedumpara, Hemali Suresh Kurne, Rajesh Vishnu Adrekar and a Chartered Accountant, Mansha Nimesh Mehta. It made Justice Varma, CBI, ED, Income Tax and member of judges committee as parties to the matter.
It contended that the observations in the judgment of the Supreme Court in K Veeraswami Vs Union of India (1991) prohibiting that no criminal case shall be registered against a judge of a High court or Supreme Court without the prior permission of the Chief Justice of India is one rendered per incuriam and sub silentio.
The petitioners claimed that the three-member committee constituted by the Chief Justice of India on March 22 has no jurisdiction to conduct a probe into the incident, constituting various cognisable under the BNS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita).
It also said that the decision investing the committee the power to conduct such an investigation is one rendered void ab initio inasmuch as the Collegium cannot confer jurisdiction upon itself to order so where the Parliament or the Constitution has conferred none.
