Justice Yashwant Verma, facing an impeachment motion in Parliament related to a controversial case involving bags of cash, has filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking justice. Notably, he has kept his identity confidential in this petition.
Justice Verma Supreme Court Petition: An unprecedented case related to the judiciary is currently a topic of national discussion. Justice Yashwant Verma, a current Supreme Court Justice facing an impeachment motion after bags of cash were recovered from his residence, has filed a petition in the Supreme Court. In this petition, he has submitted documents under the title 'XXX vs. Union of India,' keeping his identity confidential.
In the petition, he has sought the annulment of the Supreme Court's internal inquiry report and the revocation of the recommendation made by the then Chief Justice—which called for his removal from the judicial post.
The Use of 'XXX' Name: Why and When?
In the Supreme Court and High Courts, the use of 'XXX,' 'ABC,' 'XYZ,' or other pseudonyms is generally done in cases where protecting the petitioner's privacy is essential. For example:
- To conceal the identity of sexual assault or rape victims
- In cases involving minors and adolescents
- To protect the identity of children in marital disputes or custody cases
- To maintain the privacy of individuals holding particularly sensitive positions
The Supreme Court has previously directed that the names of victims related to rape or sexual offenses should not be made public. In such a situation, Justice Verma's use of the name 'XXX' can be termed a controversial but legally valid step.
What are the Main Demands in the Petition?
In this sensitive petition, Justice Verma has requested the Supreme Court to: Annul the report of the Supreme Court's internal inquiry committee against him. Revoke the recommendation sent by the then Chief Justice, which proposed his removal from the judicial post. Ensure that he receives full judicial due process and the right to privacy before his removal under Article 124(4) of the Constitution.
This petition was filed in the Supreme Court Registry on July 17, 2025. After the necessary corrections were made by the registry, it was finally registered on July 24. It is titled 'XXX vs. Union of India' and is the 699th civil writ petition filed in the Supreme Court this year. The central government has been made the first respondent in this case, while the Supreme Court itself is the second respondent—which makes it even more extraordinary.
Parallel Petition: Demand for FIR
Another significant twist has emerged in Justice Verma's case. A separate petition filed by Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara demands that an FIR be registered against Justice Verma. This petition states that a criminal investigation is necessary given the seriousness of the incident involving the cash found in bags at his home, its burning, and then its alleged disappearance.
Interestingly, this petition is also listed before the bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih and will be heard at serial number 59. Justice Verma's petition, on the other hand, is listed at serial number 56. This episode has sparked a new debate about the balance between privacy and transparency in the judiciary.
