After two meetings, the Supreme Court Collegium on Monday recommended the repatriation of Delhi High Court Judge Justice Yashwant Varma, who is facing a probe into the alleged discovery of huge stash of cash from his official residence in Delhi after a fire incident, to his parent Allahabad High Court.

Hours after the transfer recommendation to the Centre was made public in a resolution uploaded on the website of the top court, the president of the Allahabad High Court Bar Association (AHCBA) Anil Tiwari said the high court lawyers will go on an indefinite strike from Tuesday in protest against this move.

Justice Varma’s proposed transfer could come into effect after the Centre accepts the recommendation, which came on a day when the Delhi High Court in a notice withdrew judicial work from Justice Varma “with immediate effect”.

“The Supreme Court Collegium in its meetings held on March 20 and 24, 2025 has recommended the repatriation of Justice Yashwant Varma, Judge, High Court of Delhi, to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,” said the resolution adopted by the Supreme Court.

Lawyers of Allahabad High Court Bar Association will stage an indefinite strike from March 25 onwards. The Allahabad High Court Bar Association has strongly opposed the transfer of Justice Varma back to the Allahabad High Court. In a general house meeting held on Monday, the association passed a resolution demanding impeachment proceedings against Justice Varma and calling for an investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Allahabad Bar Association President Anil Tiwari stated that Justice Varma is unfit to continue as a judge and that the association opposes his transfer to any court. He also demanded that all judgments delivered by Justice Varma during his tenure at both the Allahabad and Delhi High Courts be reconsidered.

Bar Association President Anil Tiwari further criticized the judicial system’s response to the scandal. “If `15 Lakh is found at the residence of a common government employee, they are sent to jail. Justice Varma should resign. If he is posted here, we will not allow him to be welcomed. If necessary, we will also halt work.”

The AHCBA last week voiced its opposition to any such move, saying the high court is not a “trash bin”. In a series of resolutions, it also urged the CJI to allow investigating agencies to take action against Justice Varma besides calling for impeachment proceedings against the judge. The lawyers also abstained from judicial work after the lunch break. The association further demanded a review of judgements delivered by the judge.

Meanwhile, Legal experts on Monday described as “preposterous”, “premature” and “unjustified” the Allahabad High Court Bar Association’s demand that all verdicts of Justice Yashwant Varma, embroiled in a cash-discovery controversy, be reviewed and steps taken for his impeachment. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan said he does not agree with the bar association’s demand as “it is too premature for anything”.

Commenting on the issue, senior advocate Shoeb Alam said, “The call by the bar association to review and annul every judgment passed by Justice Varma in his more-than-a-decade-long tenure is preposterous and not envisaged under any law.”

Senior advocate Maninder Singh said public opinion or mere allegations cannot be the basis to scrutinise the verdicts delivered by judges and a judge should not be impeached on media reports.

On March 21, the Supreme Court said Delhi High Court Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya had initiated an in-house inquiry against Justice Varma and

there was a separate proposal to transfer him. “There is misinformation and rumours are being spread with regard to the incident at the residence of Justice Yashwant Varma,” the Supreme Court statement added.

Upon receiving the information, the apex court said Chief Justice Upadhyaya “commenced the in-house enquiry procedure, collecting evidence and information”. Justice Upadhyaya was stated to have commenced the enquiry prior to a meeting of the apex court collegium on March 20. Justice Varma’s proposed transfer could come into effect after the Centre accepts the recommendation.

The alleged cash discovery happened following a fire at Varma’s Lutyens Delhi residence at around 11.35 pm on March 14, prompting the fire officials to rush to the spot and douse it. The Supreme Court collegium headed by CJI Sanjiv Khanna and the Delhi High Court subsequently issued a series of directives, including the withdrawal of judicial work from Justice Varma on Monday.

The CJI constituted an in-house committee to conduct an inquiry and asked Delhi HC Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya not to assign any judicial work to Justice Yashwant Varma.

In an unprecedented move, the apex court late on March 22 uploaded on its website an in-house inquiry report, including photos and videos, into alleged discovery of a huge stash of cash at the residence of Justice Varma. The report contains photos and videos of the cash allegedly discovered at a storeroom at Justice Varma’s house during a fire fighting operation on the night of Holi, March 14 aside from his response.

Justice Varma has “unequivocally” denied the any cash being placed in the storeroom either by him or any of his family members while “strongly denouncing the suggestion that the alleged cash belonged” to them. He said the allegations of cash discovery from his official residence clearly appeared to be a conspiracy to frame and malign him. “The very idea or suggestion that this cash was kept or stored by us is totally preposterous,” he said.

The inquiry report submitted by Chief Justice Upadhyaya also contained material with regard to official communication which says “four to five semi-burnt stacks of Indian currency” were found. “On examining the incident reported, the material available and the response of Justice Yashwant Varma, what I find is that the Commissioner of Police in his report dated March 16, 2025 has reported that as per the guard posted at the residence of Justice Yashwant Varma, the debris and other partially burnt articles were removed from the room where the fire had broken out in the morning of March 15, 2025,” said the report dated March 21 and made public the next day.

The report went on, “The enquiry conducted by me, prima facie, does not reveal possibility of entry or access to the room by any person other than those residing in the bungalow, the servants, the gardeners and CPWD personnel, if any.” “I am of the prima facie opinion that the entire matter warrants a deeper probe,” Justice Upadhyaya added.