20 July

Rule of law must prevail:Nedumpara’s Third petition in SC seeks FIR against Justice Varma (Part 1)

Posted by Mathews J Nedumpara

in Blogs/Articles

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

(CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2025

(UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)

IN THE MATTER OF:

MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA & ORS. PETITIONERS

VERSUS

THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS

WITH

I.A. NO. OF 2025

APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN THE ABOVE-MENTIONED WRIT PETITION FILED BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT AS PARTY IN PERSONS

PAPER BOOK

(KINDLY SEE INDEX INSIDE)

MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA & 3 ORS.:

PARTY-IN-PERSONS

MOB. NO. +91 9820535428

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

S.NO. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PAGE NO.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

INDEX

S. No. Particulars of Documents Page No. of part to which it belongs Remarks

Part I

[Contents of Paper Book] Part-II

[Contents of file alone.

[i] [ii] [iii] [iv] [v]

E-Court Fee

1 Listing Performa. ‘A1-A3’ `A-A1’

2 Cover page of Paper Book A-2

3 Index of Record of Proceedings A-3

4 Defect List A-4

5 Note Sheet NS 1 to

6 Synopsis & List of Dates B-C

7 Writ Petition with Affidavit.

8 Annexure P-1

A copy of the order dated 28.03.2025 passed by this Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No. 15529 of 2025

9 Annexure P-2

A copy of the report dated 03.05.2025

10 Annexure P-3

A copy of the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 534 of 2025 without annexures.

11 Annexure P- 4

A true copy of the order dated 21.05.2025 passed by this Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition (Civil) no. 534 of 2025

12 Annexure P-5

A copy of the representation to the President without annexures

13 I.A. NO. OF 2025

Application for permission to appear and argue the above mentioned Writ Petition filed before this Hon’ble Court as Party in Person.

14 A true copy of the Aadhar Card Petitioner No. 1.

15 A true copy of the Aadhar Card Petitioner No.2

16 A true copy of the Aadhar Card Petitioner No.3

17 A true copy of the Aadhar Card Petitioner No.4

18 A true copy of the Aadhar Card Petitioner No.5

19 Memo of Appearances

20 F/M

PROFORMA FOR FIRST LISTING

SECTION

The case pertains to (Please tick/check the correct box)”

Central Act: (Title) Constitution of India

Section: Article 32 of Constitution of India.

Central Rule: (Title): NA

Rule No(s): NA

State Act: (Title) NA

Section: NA

State Rule: (Title) NA

Rule No(s): NA

Impugned Interim Order: (Date) NA

Impugned Final Order/Decree: (Date) NA

High Court: (Name) NA

Names of Judges: NA

Tribunal / Authority: (Name) NA

1. Name of Matter: √

Civil

Criminal

2. (a) Petitioner/Appellant No. 1: MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA & ORS.

S (b) E-mail ID: mathewsjnedumpara@gmail.com

3. (a) Respondent No. 1: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND ORS.

(b) E-mail ID: NA

4. (a) Main category classification: 18 Ordinary Civil Matter

1807 Others

(b) Sub classification: 18 Ordinary Civil Matter

1807 Others

5. Not to be listed before: NA

6. Similar / Pending matter:

(a) No similar matter is disposed of before this Hon’ble Court.

(b) No similar matter is pending before this Hon’ble Court.

7. Criminal Matters:

(a) Whether accused / convict has surrendered

Yes

(b) FIR No. NA Date: NA

(d) Sentence Awarded: NA

(e) Sentence Undergone: NA

8. Land Acquisition Matters: NA

(a) Date of Section 4 notification: NA

(b) Date of Section 6 notification: NA

9. Tax Matters: State the tax effect: NA

10. Special Category:

(First petitioner/appellant only) NA

Senior citizen > 65 Years

SC/ST

Woman/child

Disabled

Legal

Aid Case

In custody

11. Vehicle number (in case of Motor Accident Claim matters): NA

Place:

Date: New Delhi

MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA

Petitioner in Person No. 1

E-Mail: mathewsjnedumpara@gmail.com

SYNOPSIS

1. The instant, sadly, is the third petition which the Petitioners, citizens and lawyers, are constrained to institute to set the criminal law in motion, which is a statutory duty cast on the Delhi Police and the Central Government. The Central Government which is in charge of the Delhi Police, on it being reported that there has been an incident of huge volumes of currency notes, burned and partially burned, being found and clandestinely removed from the official residence of Justice Varma, a judge of the Delhi High Court, was duty bound to direct the Delhi Police to register an FIR. Its amounts to the a great failure in the discharge of its sovereign function, nay, duty to investigate crimes and secure punishment to those who violate the law.

2. Justice Varma’s daughter called the fire force soon after the fire broke out. The fire force and the police reached the spot. To their utter shock, the firemen found currency notes in a large number of plastic sacks under fire. While they were carrying out the job of dousing the fire, which took over an hour, the police also reached. They informed the higher officials of the shocking incident of huge volumes of cash being found. They took a number of videos and photographs. The Private Secretary to the judge, Mr. Kalki, who reached the spot, asked the firemen and the police to leave the premises, telling them that since the fire has been doused, their presence is no longer required and that he would take care of the scene of the fire.

3. The presence of huge volumes of cash running into crores of rupees, that too at the official residence of a judge of the Delhi High Court, who decides commercial matters involving hundreds and thousands of crores, whose residence is secured 24/7 by CRPF, would lead to the irresistible conclusion that the money which happened to catch fire is illegal money and the judge and the bribe giver, both, have committed offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, PMLA, BNS and other laws, which render it obligatory on the part of the Police to register an FIR. The Police, instead of registering an FIR, reported the matter to the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, and the latter, in turn to the Chief Justice of India. The video which the firemen and the police took came to be circulated among those in power in Delhi and remained no secret. However, the world at large did not come to know of it till the Times of India broke the news on 21.3.2025.

4. What happened thereafter in the eyes of the citizens of this country has been an eyewash. The police were duty-bound to register an FIR, but could not because of K. Veeraswami. The then Chief Justice ought to have, on his own, granted permission, for he knew that it was the said judgment that stood in the way of an FIR being registered. Instead, a committee was constituted to do what the Police man’s job is, namely, investigation. In asking the High Court judges to investigate another constitutional principle that High Court judges are not subordinates to Supreme Court judges, got violated. The Committee is nothing but an extra-constitutional authority. In reality, restraining the police man from doing his job. It was in that background that W.P. (C) Diary No. 15529 of 2025 was filed seeking registration of an FIR. The said plea was not granted, instead, the Petitioners were asked to await the Committee’s report. Since even after the committee had submitted its report, no FIR was registered, the Petitioners instituted yet another writ petition. Instead of directing the registration at least at this belated stage, the Petitioners were asked to approach their Excellencies, the President and the Prime Minister, observing that even the Court is not aware of the findings of the Committee, while in truth it was known to most that the Committee had indicted Justice Varma. The Petitioners preferred representations to Their Excellencies the President and the Prime Minister in no loss of time. To the Petitioner’s knowledge, no FIR, till date, has been registered, and there has been no direction from the Government to do so. what is at stake is the concept of the rule of law, equality before law and equal protection of law. To the ordinary citizens of this country, it looks as though there are two sets of laws in this country, one for them and another for the elite, one which allows them to walk scot-free.

Hence, the instant petition.

LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS

1991

2010 This Hon’ble Court in K. Veeraswami Versus Union of India, 1991 SCR (3) 189, was pleased to direct that no criminal case shall be registered under Section 154 of the CRPC against a judge of the High Court, Chief Justice of a High Court or a judge of the Supreme Court, without the prior approval of the Chief Justice of India.

The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill was introduced to establish a mechanism for investigating judicial misconduct. However, it lapsed without becoming law.

14.3.2025 A fire broke out at the official residence of Justice Yashwant Varma. Fire officials, while responding, discovered heaps of currency notes

March 2025 Widespread media coverage and public outcry followed. The Allahabad High Court Bar Association opposed Justice Varma’s transfer to their court.

24.3.2025 The Petitioners filed Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No. 15529 of 2025, seeking the registration of an FIR

28.3.2025 This Hon’ble Court disposed the said petition observing that no intervention was called for ‘at this stage’.

15.05.2025 W.P.(C) No. 534/ 2025 was instituted seeking the registration of an FIR.

03.05.2025 The 3-member committee submitted its report to the Chief Justice of India on the allegations against Justice Varma.

21.05.2025 W.P.(C) No. 534/ 2025 was disposed of, directing the Petitioners to approach their Excellencies, the President and the Prime Minister

26.05.2025 Petitioners preferred representations to Their Excellencies, the President and the Prime Minister, and other dignitaries in furtherance of the judgment of the

Supreme Court dated 21.05.2025

15.07.2025 No action till date has been taken in furtherance of the representations seeking registration of an FIR

15.07.2025 Hence, the present Writ Petition.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

(CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2023

(UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)

IN THE MATTER OF:

1. MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA

ADVOCATE

101, 1ST FLOOR, GUNDECHA CHAMBER,

NAGINDAS ROAD, FORT, MUMBAI,

MAHARASHTRA-400001. PETITIONER NO. 1

2. ROHINI AMIN

ADVOCATE

B-705, NIRMAN APARTMENTS, R.J. MARG, PUMP HOUSE, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI,

MAHARASHTRA-400093. PETITIONER NO. 2

3. RAJESH VISHNU ADREKAR

ADVOCATE

401, D-14, YOGI VARDHAN CHS, YOGI NAGAR ROAD, YOGI NAGAR, BORIVILI WEST, MUMBAI,

MAHARASHTRA-400092. PETITIONER NO. 3

4. MANISHA NIMESH MEHTA

CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT

PRESIDENT IOF MSME ASSOCIATION

1905, ROSELLA, PANT NAGAR, GHATKOPAR, MUMBAI,

MAHARASHTRA-400075. PETITIONER NO. 4

VERSUS

1. SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY GENERAL

NEW DELHI-110001. RESPONDENT NO. 1

2. THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE,

REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR GENERAL

DELHI HIGH COURT, SHER SHAH ROAD,

NEW DELHI-110003. RESPONDENT NO. 2

3. JUSTICE YASHWANT VERMA

JUDGE OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

NYAYA MARG, CANTON, CANTONMENT,

PRAYAGRAJ, UTTAR PRADESH 211001 RESPONDENT NO. 3

4. UNION OF INDIA

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,

DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL OF AFFAIRS

MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE

4TH FLOOR, A-WING, SHASTRI BHAWAN,

NEW DELHI-110001. RESPONDENT NO. 4

5. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE (ED)

THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR,

6TH FLOOR, LOK NAYAK BHAWAN,

KHAN MARKET, NEW DELHI. RESPONDENT NO. 5

6. STATION HOUSE OFFICER (SHO)

TULGAK ROAD POLICE STATION,

TULGAK ROAD, NEW DELHI- 110011. RESPONDENT NO. 6

7. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,

DELHI POLICE HEADQUARTERS,

JAI SINGH ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001. RESPONDENT NO. 7

8. MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

THROUGHT ITS SECRETARY

NORTH BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT,

NEW DELHI-110001. RESPONDENT NO. 8

9. FIRE DEPARTMENT, DELHI

THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR

DELHI FIRE SERVICE, CONNAUGHT PLACE

NEW DELHI-110001. RESPONDENT NO. 9

10. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR

CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD,

NEW DELHI-110003. RESPONDENT NO. 10

11. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES (CBDT),

NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001. RESPONDENT NO. 11

WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

OF INDIA AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT OFINDIA

HUMBLE PETITION OF THE

PETITIONERS IN PERSONS ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

4. The Police were duty-bound to register an FIR and set the criminal law in motion, secure the place of occurrence and seize the currency notes that were found and start an investigation with all earnestness.

5. The Petitioners are made to understand that they could not because of the judgment of this Hon’ble Court in K. Veeraswami v. Union of India, 1991 SCR (3) 189, which unknown and unbelievable to the common man, prohibits the police from registering an FIR against judges of the High Court and Supreme Court without the prior permission of the Chief Justice of India. The then Chief Justice of India, to his credit, was pleased to direct the uploading of a video of the incident on the Supreme Court Website, where a fireman is heard saying “Mahatma Gandhi mein aag lag rahi hai bhai”. The said action on the part of the Chief Justice will be written in golden letters in the annals of history. The Hon’ble Chief Justice, however, did not on his own grant permission to the Police to register an FIR, knowing fully the impediment that K. Veerswami creates in the police discharging its statutory duty. That was a great error on his part because he knew for certain that what stood in the way of the police in registering an FIR is the aforesaid judgment of this Court in K. Veeraswami case.

6. The Chief Justice instead constituted a committee consisting of three High Court judges. The said committee was constituted purportedly in exercise of the jurisdiction conferred on him by the resolution adopted by the full court of the Supreme Court titled ‘Restatement of the values of judicial life’. The said resolution has no statutory force. The purpose of the resolution is not – and cannot – be to substitute the criminal laws of the land. The purpose of the resolution was to address grievances and complaints against judges in the discharge of their duties and conduct in judicial proceedings and in public life.

7. The judges of the High Courts are not subordinate to the Chief Justice of India/judges of the Supreme Court. They are subordinate to the Supreme Court only to the extent that an appeal will lie to the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice of India has no jurisdiction to ask the Chief Justice and judges of the High Courts to assume the role of a police man and investigate a crime. And nor do the High Court judges have the jurisdiction/authority, expertise or knowledge to undertake such a job. The Petitioners were aghast by the constitution of a committee by the Chief Justice and the investigation by a body which is incompetent and lacking in jurisdiction. The Petitioners felt it to be a complete miscarriage of justice. Nothing but a restraint on the police from exercising its statutory duty, nay, sovereign power to set the criminal law in motion and secure punishment to those who commit crimes, no matter his status or position.

Download the Article below to know more

Final- WP YASHWANT VERMA 15.07.2025

Rule of law must prevail:Nedumpara’s Third petition in SC seeks FIR against Justice Varma (Part 1)

Disclaimer: