New Delhi: The report of the inquiry committee into the popular cash-at-home case involving former Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Verma was presented in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday. In its report, the three-member committee has accepted all the three allegations made against Justice Verma as true. However, the report also says that there is no indication of any major conspiracy.
Let us tell you, this matter is related to the recovery of large quantity of Rs 500 notes from the store room of his government residence. According to the committee, despite such a huge amount being present there, Justice Verma could not clarify whose money it was, where it came from and why it was kept in the premises of the government residence.
What was the first allegation?
The committee accepted the allegation related to alleged undeclared cash recovered from the government residence in Tughlaq Crescent, New Delhi as true. According to the report, the committee did not find the explanation given by Justice Verma regarding the presence of cash satisfactory. The committee admitted that clear answers to important questions were not given in this matter.
Second charge: Failure to preserve evidence
Along with this, serious questions were also raised regarding the preservation of evidence in the investigation. According to the committee, the condition of the store room changed before it was formally sealed and inspected. After this, some currency notes present there were also not found available. The committee considered this to be serious negligence in keeping the evidence safe.
However, the report did not say that Justice Verma himself had removed the cash. That is, the conclusion of lapse in safeguarding the evidence is one thing and proving the responsibility of removing the money is a different matter.
The answer was also not considered satisfactory
The committee also kept Justice Verma's clarification dated March 22, 2025 under scrutiny. According to the report, his answer was unclear in many places and did not completely match the statements of independent witnesses and the available evidence. On this basis the third allegation was also considered true. However, despite the report, the question remains as to how much cash was there in the store room and what was its complete account. The committee has not been able to determine the exact amount. In such a situation, some important questions related to the case still remain unanswered.