Think what will happen if a person files an appeal in the court in the name XXX? It may be that on the very first day, Judge Sir reprimanded the appeal court. But if a judge has done the same thing himself? Yes, such a surprising case has come to light, in this case, the High Court judge himself has filed a petition in the Supreme Court named XXX. Actually, these judges are Justice Yashwant Verma, who are facing a proposal in the case of cash sack found at their residence. In such a situation, there is also a question whether a common man can also file a petition in this way?

When and why the name of this method is used

Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice Augustine George Christ heard this petition by Justice Yashwant Verma. His name has been written in this petition. This method is used to hide the identity of female petitioners victims of sexual harassment or sexual assault in court records. It is also used to hide the identity of adolescents and minors in the controversies of married custody. Because the court says that they should not tell the name of the rape victim in the judgment.

What is in Justice Verma’s appeal?

Justice Verma, in a petition called XXX, appealed to declare the report of the Internal Investigation Committee invalid, in which he was found guilty for the recovery of cash. Justice Verma has also requested that Sanjeev Khanna’s recommendation of May 8 should also be canceled. In this, an appeal was made against him to start impeachment proceedings in Parliament.

Why petition filed as XXX

Justice Verma has filed a petition for approval not to reveal his identity. In this petition, he has said that if his petition is not approved, he may have to face irreparable losses. That is why he sought approval to register in the name XXX in his petition, so that his identity could be hidden.

ALSO READ: The world’s first lipstick was made of deer fat, this company presented in the market

The Supreme Court has asked Justice Yashwant Verma, Judge of Allahabad High Court in the cash scandal, that the report of the inquiry committee should also be filed with its petition, after that the case will be heard. Justice Verma has also questioned the formation of a three -judge committee formed to investigate the case, on which the court asked him that if he had objections, why did he not come to court at the same time.

In the report of a three -judge committee, Justice Yashwant Verma was convicted of getting cash from the house, against which Justice Verma filed a petition and demanded that the report be declared invalid. Justice Yashwant Verma has also opposed this recommendation of former Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna, in which he had asked to remove Yashwant Verma from the post immediately.

On Monday (July 28, 2025), a petition of Justice Yashwant Verma was found in front of a bench headed by Justice Dipankar Dutta. Justice Dipankar Dutta from Justice Verma said that he has not seen the report of the inquiry committee and he should have also filed a report along with his petition. He said that first report, then he will hear his petition.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared on behalf of Justice Yashwant Verma. He said, ‘I will report to the court. You can postpone the hearing or first listen to the legal questions that we want to keep. On the recommendation of the removal of Justice Yashwant Verma from the post, Kapil Sibal said that the process of removing the judges from the post has been given in the Constitution and Judges Inquiry Act, it is not according to him to form an inquiry committee on behalf of the Chief Justice.

Kapil Sibal said that the power to remove judges has been given to the Parliament under Article 124 of the Constitution. The judge can be removed on the basis of misconduct or disability. Any other way has been given to remove a judge in the law or constitution of India. Prior to the report of the committee, the conduct of the judge is not discussed in Parliament either.

Kapil Sibal said that but the video was made public in this case, people started discussing, committee was also formed, which was wrong. Justice Dipankar Dutta, after hearing Kapil Sibal’s arguments, said, ‘So you say to the committee that you cannot investigate or come to court at the same time against the formation of the committee. Why now? ‘ He said that you are citing any letter from Chief Justice. He did not even put him on record. How will there be a hearing like this?

Justice Dipankar Dutta also told the petitioner that he is also opposing sending the report to the President and the Prime Minister. He said that the President appoints judges. If there are constitutional heads, then why is there being opposed to giving them information. Kapil Sibal said in the court that he will also keep the investigation report and the letter of the Chief Justice in the record. On the questions of Justice Dipankar, Kapil Sibal said that he was not opposing giving information to the President, but the money received from the house was from Justice Verma, why was it accepted. It should have been investigated whose money was there

(With input from Nipun Sehgal)

First day of monsoon session Jagdeep Dhankhar The resignation from the post of Vice President has created a political stir. During this short tenure, many controversies were added to his name. Many times he got entangled with the opposition and many times questioned the government and crossed the ‘Laxman Rekha’. National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC) He also raised questions on the Supreme Court’s decision to cancel the act.

Jagdeep Dhankhar On Monday (21 July 2025) from 63 opposition MPs Justice Yashwant Verma received a notice to remove from the post. He accepted the notice of opposition without informing the BJP. Government Impeachment Wanted to pass the proposal in the Lok Sabha earlier. It would be promoted as the success of the government and a clear message was given to the judiciary, but Opposition Has won first.

Dhankhar When did I cross the ‘Laxman Rekha’?

During his tenure as Vice President Dhankhar With opposition Uncontrollably There was a conflict. He was accused of being biased. Due to these allegations, a no -confidence motion was brought against him last year. Since then, the government is worried about the change in their functioning. Now opposition leaders are getting a chance to speak more.

Questions asked from the government on the farmers’ movement

Dhankhar Minimum support price (Msp) For the protest of farmers running since 2020, the government was taken over. In December 2024, he speaking at a public event Shivraj Lion Chauhan Was asked sharp questions from. They He told the Agriculture Minister present on the stage, ,I request you That Please tell me what to the farmer Promise Did Went Was, Promise Complete Why No to be done? Last year there was a movement. There is a movement this year too. The wheel of time is moving.

Targeting Supreme Court

Earlier this month Jagdeep Dhankhar Done Justice Yashwant Verma had targeted the judiciary over the dispute. They cash Seizure Demanded to start a criminal investigation in the case of. He gave the National Judicial Appointment Commission (Njac) Questions should also be raised on the Supreme Court’s decision to cancel the Act. He had asked the question that how can the Supreme Court cancel the law passed almost unanimously by both houses of Parliament?

Government became angry on Raghav Chadha case

Rajya Sabha MP of Aam Aadmi Party for not following the rules of the House 11 The Rajya Sabha was suspended on August 2023. Dhankhar The government ended his suspension, which angered the government. However in this case Aap The MP also moved the Supreme Court.

Also read: Formation of Electoral College, Appointment of Returning Officer … EC started preparations for Vice President’s election after Jagdeep Dhankhar resignation

Kiren rijiju on kapil sibbal: Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju called him a “average lawyer”, calling him a scathing attack on senior advocate and Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal and said that he could not impose his personal agenda on Parliament. Rijiju’s statement came when Kapil Sibal said that the opposition should not support any impeachment motion against Justice Yashwant Verma until the process of impeachment begins to investigate the alleged communal comment of Justice Shekhar Yadav.

Sibal is an average lawyer – Rijiju
Rijiju described Kapil Sibal as a very average lawyer and said that he considers himself a person to light up every subject, but it is not so. He said that many MPs have more understanding and knowledge than him.

Parliament belongs to everyone, not any one
The Union Minister said that Parliament runs through collective participation of all members and not with the intentions of any one lawyer-Sansad. We are working in the interest of the country, not to run someone’s agenda.

Parliament only right to remove judges
Rijiju also clarified that Parliament is the only platform to remove a judge of the Supreme Court or High Court. He said that no other institution can do this because Parliament is the highest elected institution of the country.

Government reversed Sibal’s allegations
Kapil Sibal has accused the government of saving Justice Shekhar Yadav and said that the petition filed by opposition MPs against him is pending since December 2024. Reacting to this, Rijiju said that Sibal’s behavior is biased and personal.

Justice yashwant varma: A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court to register an FIR against Justice Yashwant Verma. The petition of 4 lawyers from Mumbai said that it is a criminal case to get a large amount of money at the judge’s house. For this, instead of forming an inquiry committee of 3 judges, other agencies including police should have asked for investigation.

The petition of lawyers Matthews Nedumpra, Hemali Kurne, Rajesh Adrekar and Manisha Mehta also opposed the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the 1991 case. It was said in that decision that the consent of the Chief Justice of India is necessary before the FIR against the High Court or Supreme Court judge. The petitioners have said that only the President and the governors have been exempted from the trial in the constitution. With its decision, the Supreme Court gave the judges separate special status from the common citizens.

The petitioners have also made the party along with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, the Central Government, Delhi Police, Delhi Fire Department, ED, CBI and Income Tax Department. Apart from this, Justice Sheel Nagu, Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Anu Shivraman, members of the 3 -member inquiry committee constituted by Supreme Court Chief Justice Sanjeev Khanna have also been made side.

It has been said in the petition that the FIR should have been lodged immediately after receiving the burnt cash in the judge’s house on 14 March and the arrest should have been made, but now the case has been handed over to the judges’ inquiry committee, which is not correct. Just as an FIR is registered against common citizens in a criminal case, it should be done in this case as well. The Supreme Court cancels the comments made in the Veeraswami verdict of 1991 and register a case to the investigating agencies and ask them to investigate.

The petition claimed that due to giving separate status to the judges, he has survived the FIR even in serious cases like Poxo. These petitioners associated with an organization called National Lawyers Campaign for Judicial Transparency and Reforms have reminded that Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill was brought to Parliament in 2010 to investigate the corruption of judges and other wrong conduct, but that law could not be made.

Also read:-
Parliament Budget Session: ‘The throat roams around the throat by putting Ambedkar’s plank and the matter of changing the Constitution’, Rijiju recited in Parliament and said in Parliament, he said- Kharge said- not in mind

Judge Yashwant Verma Case: India’s Chief Justice (CJI) Sanjeev Khanna has formed a three -member committee to investigate the allegations of getting cash from the bungalow of Justice Yashwant Verma of Delhi High Court. Meanwhile, the process of getting burnt notes still continues outside Justice Verma’s house. ABP News has found a 500 burnt note in the corner of Justice Verma’s house.

Burning notes are still available outside Justice Verma’s house

The team of NDMC had come to cleanliness outside the house of Justice Verma on Sunday (23 March 2025), even then he had recovered the burnt notes. Clean worker Surender said that he works with garbage lifting vehicles here and he had received a burnt notes of 500 rupees here for the last 4-5 days. He said, “We have got 500 notes even today.”

Another employee Indrajit said, “We work in this circle. We collect garbage from the roads. We were cleaning here 4-5 days ago and collecting garbage, when we got some small pieces of burnt notes of 500 rupees. We got them on the same day. Now we have got 1-2 pieces. Now we do not know where the fire.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdi2gsf3itq

Justice Verma transferred to Allahabad High Court

A big revelation was revealed by a fire in the residential bungalow of Justice Yashwant Verma of Delhi High Court. A large quantity of cash was allegedly recovered from his house. This incident stirred the judicial corridors. Taking action in this case, the Chief Justice of India called a meeting of the Supreme Court Collegium in which it was decided to transfer Justice Verma to Allahabad High Court.

Also read: Justice Yashwant Varma: Video, report, documents, Supreme Court uploaded a letter of Justice Yashwant Verma incident

Rajya sabha: As soon as the proceedings of the Rajya Sabha started today (March 21), the issue of a pile of notes found at the Delhi High Court judge’s house arose. Congress MP Jairam Ramesh said this matter
Raising, he told the Chairman that 55 members have written to you demanding that the Central Government take necessary steps to increase the accountability of the judiciary.

The government bungalow of Delhi High Court Judge Yashwant Verma caught fire. He was not at home. In such a situation, the family immediately called the fire brigade and the police. Fire personnel saw a pile of notes inside the bungalow while controlling the fire. After this, this matter reached the big officials and then the case reached the Supreme Court.

Justice Yashwant Verma’s immediate transfer
When the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjeev Khanna came to know about this, he immediately called the collegium meeting and transferred Justice Yashwant Verma to the Allahabad High Court from the Delhi High Court. Justice Verma was first posted in the Allahabad High Court.

What will happen next?
Will this case end on transfer or will further action be taken on Justice Verma? This will depend on what the Supreme Court concludes in the investigation to be held at its level in this case. It is possible that if Justice Yashwant Verma is unable to save himself in the investigation, then there is a demand for resignation from him. If not resigned, impeachment can be brought against him in Parliament. Explain that only by bringing impeachment, there is a provision to remove a Supreme Court or High Court Justice from his post.

The possibility of other action can also be denied after Justice Yashwant Verma is removed from the post. At the moment, it will be interesting to see what steps the Supreme Court takes in this entire case.