“Totally Preposterous”: Justice Yashwant Varma Denies Cash Recovery Charges, Alleges Conspiracy
In an extraordinary courtroom exchange, Justice Yashwant Varma of the Delhi High Court has vehemently denied allegations of cash recovery from his residence, labeling them “totally preposterous” and accusing unnamed individuals of orchestrating a conspiracy to frame him. The dramatic denial came during a hearing before a bench headed by Chief Justice of Delhi High Court, following claims circulating in certain media outlets regarding the alleged recovery.
The controversy arose from reports suggesting that a significant amount of cash was recovered from Justice Varma’s official residence. The reports, which gained traction rapidly, prompted a swift and unequivocal response from the judge himself, who addressed the matter directly during the court proceedings.
Justice Varma, speaking before the Chief Justice and other members of the bench, categorically rejected the allegations, stating, “This is totally preposterous. There is absolutely no truth to these claims. It is a part of a larger conspiracy to frame me and tarnish my reputation.”
The judge’s assertion of a “conspiracy” has added a layer of complexity to the already sensitive matter, raising questions about the motives behind the allegations and the potential individuals involved. He did not elaborate on the specifics of the alleged conspiracy, but his strong denial indicated a firm belief that he was being targeted.
The Chief Justice, acknowledging the gravity of the situation, listened attentively to Justice Varma’s statements. The court then recorded Justice Varma’s denial and his allegations of a conspiracy. The court noted that it was taking the matter very seriously.
The media reports had created a stir, particularly within the legal fraternity, given the unprecedented nature of the allegations against a sitting High Court judge. The denial from Justice Varma has now shifted the focus to the origins of the claims and the potential ramifications for the judicial system.
The court stated that “It is important to maintain the integrity of the judicial system, and all necessary steps will be taken to ensure that the truth is established.”
The court also said, “The allegations made are serious, and a thorough investigation is required to ascertain the facts.”
The legal community is now closely watching the developments, as the court considers the next course of action. The matter has raised significant concerns about the potential impact on the judiciary’s credibility and the need for a transparent and impartial investigation.
The court has not released any further official statements, and it remains to be seen whether a formal inquiry will be initiated. The allegations and the judge’s denial have underscored the importance of upholding the principles of justice and fairness, even in the face of extraordinary circumstances.