In an unprecedented step, Justice Yashwant Varma has chosen to conceal his identity in a petition filed in the Supreme Court, where he has challenged the findings of an in-house inquiry panel that recommended his removal from judicial office. This decision to maintain anonymity in the legal proceedings is seen as unusual, particularly because it is not commonly exercised by sitting judges. The matter was listed on the Supreme Court's cause list as "XXX vs The Union of India," where "XXX" refers to Justice Varma. His request to keep his identity confidential was made to avoid public disclosure that he believes could cause him significant personal and professional harm.
Although the Supreme Court has a precedent for using pseudonyms like ‘XXX’ in sensitive matters—typically in cases involving sexual assault survivors, minors, or other vulnerable parties—its application in a matter involving a sitting High Court judge is considered highly atypical. Justice Varma argued that because the in-house inquiry process was confidential by design, prematurely revealing his identity would not only be against established principles but would also inflict irreparable damage to his reputation, especially when no formal charges have been proven against him.
Justice Varma's petition outlines his concerns about media leaks during the inquiry process, which he claims have already distorted public perception through selective and inaccurate reporting. He emphasized that as a serving judge, the mere circulation of such information, let alone formal publication of his identity, is damaging to the integrity of the office he holds. According to him, the inquiry had procedural shortcomings and lacked a formal complaint, relying instead on presumptions and internal assumptions, thereby rendering its conclusions flawed.
The controversy stems from a fire incident at his official residence in Delhi on March 14, during which authorities reportedly discovered a large amount of unaccounted cash. Justice Varma was not present at the residence at the time. However, a subsequent investigation by a Supreme Court-appointed panel concluded that there was enough substance in the matter to recommend action, asserting that Justice Varma and his family maintained control over the space where the cash was found.
Following these developments, Justice Varma was transferred to the Allahabad High Court. On July 18, he filed a petition in the Supreme Court, seeking to annul both the findings of the inquiry panel and the recommendation made by the then Chief Justice of India for his removal. His plea underscores the personal and professional consequences of the case, insisting that his side of the story has not been adequately heard and that the inquiry process lacked fairness and due diligence. As the matter proceeds, it remains a rare and closely watched case in the Indian judiciary, particularly because it involves a sitting High Court judge seeking anonymity to protect his dignity amid serious allegations.
