New Delhi [India], May 28 : Amid reports of the Centre considering an impeachment motion against Justice Yashwant Varma and initiating impeachment proceedings against him over the alleged recovery of unaccounted cash from his residence, BJP leader and senior advocate Nalin Kohli on Wednesday called the matter extremely serious and emphasised the need for both judicial and criminal action.
Speaking to ANI, Nalin Kohli said, "This is a very serious matter to find a pile of money on fire at the house of a sitting judge. It is also a very sensitive matter and should be investigated thoroughly. The society also rightfully expects the whole truth to come out. That's why former Chief Justice, Justice Sanjiv Khanna, constituted a committee to gather all relevant information and present the facts before the judiciary."
"In the matter of corruption, the executive, legislature, judiciary, and the media, which is the fourth pillar of democracy, all want investigations. There can be only two things, first, whether the process should be started against that judge under Article 124 so that he be removed from office. Secondly, whether there should be an FIR against him or not, because this also raises a question of criminality," added Kohli.

Punjab Minister Harpal Singh Cheema also responded to the same and said, "He (Yashwant Varma) might have been involved in corruption. So, such a large sum of currency notes was seen. Now, the matter is under the Central Government. So, I think action should be taken against anyone who indulges in corruption...Before impeachment, legal actions that apply to common citizens should also be taken against him. This is a major criminal case. It should be taken seriously by the Prime Minister."
Notably, a motion of impeachment is a formal process in the Parliament to remove a Supreme Court or High Court judge from office. It is initiated by members of Parliament and requires a special majority for passage in both houses.
The motion must be supported by a majority of the total membership of the House and at least two-thirds of the members present and voting.
Earlier in the day, Communist Party of India (CPI) MP P Sandosh Kumar wrote a letter to the presidents of all political parties, demanding their support for initiating impeachment proceedings against Delhi High Court Judge Yashwant Varma.
He urged all political parties to rise above partisanship and take constitutional responsibility to safeguard the credibility of the judiciary.
CPI General Secretary D Raja also said that the credibility of the judiciary needs to be restored, and his party will support the action against Justice Varma.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court refused to entertain a plea seeking the registration of an FIR against Justice Yashwant Varma over the allegations.
A bench led by Justice Abhay S Oka suggested that the petitioner, Advocate Mathews J Nedumpara, should first file a representation to the Prime Minister and the President of India before approaching the Supreme Court.
"File representation before those authorities first calling them to take action, then file writ seeking mandamus", the bench stated before dismissing the plea.
The Court noted that, according to a press release issued by the Supreme Court on May 8, the in-house inquiry committee has submitted its report, which has since been forwarded to the Prime Minister and the President of India.
The Court was not inclined to consider the submissions in the plea, as it was of the view that the matter had already been initiated as per the official procedure."You don't know the contents of the report (inquiry committee report), even we don't know. The CJI has sent the report to the Prime Minister and President", Justice Oka stated.
The Court thus suggested that the counsel file a representation before those aforesaid authorities first, before moving a petition in the Supreme Court seeking directions.
On May 4, a panel of judges tasked with conducting an internal inquiry into allegations of cash being discovered at Justice Yashwant Varma's official residence submitted its report to the then Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna.