Fire Incident at Justice Yashwant Verma’s Residence

The recent incident involving Justice Yashwant Verma of the Delhi High Court has been marked by conflicting reports and significant developments.

Fire Incident and Initial Reports

On March 14, 2025, a fire broke out at Justice Varma’s official residence in Lutyens’ Delhi. At that time, Justice Verma was reportedly not in the city, and his family members alerted the fire brigade and police. Initial media reports claimed that firefighters discovered a substantial amount of cash, allegedly around ₹15 crore, in various rooms of the bungalow after extinguishing the fire.

Contradictory Statements

However, the Delhi Fire Service (DFS) contradicted these claims. Atul Garg, the chief of DFS, stated that during the firefighting operations, no cash was found by the firefighters. He detailed that the fire was confined to a storeroom containing stationery and household items, and was brought under control within 15 minutes without any injuries.

Supreme Court’s Response and Transfer

In response to the initial reports, the Supreme Court initiated an in-house inquiry as per established procedures. The Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court was tasked with collecting evidence and information related to the incident and was expected to submit a report to the Chief Justice of India. Concurrently, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended the transfer of Justice Verma back to the Allahabad High Court, where he had previously served until October 2021. The Supreme Court clarified that this transfer was a routine judicial administrative decision and was unrelated to the fire incident or the allegations concerning the cash discovery.

Reactions from the Legal Community

The legal community reacted strongly to the allegations. The Allahabad High Court Bar Association expressed dismay over Justice Varma’s transfer following the reports of cash recovery. They highlighted concerns about the judiciary’s integrity and the potential impact on public trust.

Current Status

As of now, there is a significant discrepancy between initial media reports and official statements from the DFS. The judiciary’s internal review processes are ongoing, and it is essential to await the outcomes of these investigations before drawing conclusions. The situation underscores the importance of relying on verified information and the need for thorough investigations to uphold the integrity of judicial institutions.