Delhi Judge Denies Seizure Of Charred Cash From Lutyens Bungalow, Calls It 'Totally Preposterous'

As the Supreme Court shared videos and photographs on Saturday depicting burnt cash supposedly retrieved from Justice Yashwant Varma's residence, the Delhi High Court judge strongly denied any removal or confiscation of banknotes from his property following a fire in his storeroom the previous week.

In his response to a series of questions posed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna through the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court, Justice Varma stated, "Assuming without admitting that the video was taken immediately at the time of the incident at the site, none of it appears to have been recovered or seized."

Photo Credit: www.allahabadhighcourt.in

Justice Varma, who was absent from his home on the night of the incident on March 14, explained that his daughter and staff had told him the authorities did not display any sacks containing charred notes or currency being removed after the fire was extinguished.

"What baffles me is the complete absence of any sacks of allegedly burnt currency which were ever recovered or seized. We categorically assert that neither my daughter, PS nor household staff were shown these so-called sacks of burnt currency," Justice Varma remarked in his response.

"My staff present said that there was no 'removal' of currency which was allegedly found at the site or removed from the premises," he added.

The footage showing a bag filled with charred notes being recovered from Justice Varma's residence was provided by the Delhi Police Commissioner to the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court.

Denying claims that heaps of burnt cash were taken from his property, Justice Varma said, "The only thing which was cleared was debris and what they considered to be salvageable."

"None of the staff was shown any remnants of cash or currency that may have been present on site," he further noted.

Insisting that neither he nor his family had placed cash in the storeroom, Justice Varma described the notion as "totally preposterous."

"The very idea or suggestion that this cash was kept or stored by us is totally preposterous. The suggestion that one would store cash in an open, freely accessible and commonly used storeroom near the staff quarters or in an outhouse verges on the incredible and incredulous," he asserted in his reply to the CJI.