NEW DELHI: Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar raised serious questions over what he termed as a lack of transparency and accountability within the higher judiciary, specifically in light of the alleged cash recovery from Delhi High Court Judge Yashwant Varma’s residence on March 14-15.
Addressing the 6th batch of Rajya Sabha interns at the Vice-President’s Enclave, Dhankhar said, “It is now over a month. Even if it is a can of worms… Even if there are skeletons in the cupboard… time to blow up the can. Let the cupboard collapse. Let the worms and skeletons be in public domain so that cleansing takes place.”
He pointed out that for seven days after the incident, there was no public knowledge or legal action. “Is the delay explainable? Condonable? In any ordinary situation — and ordinary situations define the rule of law — things would have been different,” he said.
The matter only came to light after a media report on March 21, which created shock across the country. Dhankhar further highlighted that till date, no First Information Report (FIR) has been registered in the case.
“It is the law of the land that every cognizable offence must be reported. Failure to report is itself a crime,” he asserted. “An FIR can be registered against anyone — including the Vice-President. But if it’s about a judge, it requires internal judicial approval — which is not sanctioned anywhere in the Constitution.”
He emphasized that the Constitution only grants prosecution immunity to the President and Governors, adding, “So how come a category beyond the law has secured this immunity? Every Indian, young and old, is deeply concerned.”
He criticized the judiciary’s formation of a three-member internal committee to look into the matter. “Investigation is the domain of the executive. Is this committee sanctioned under the Constitution or any parliamentary law? No. What authority does it have?” he asked.
“If a committee is outside constitutional mandate, can its recommendation have legitimacy?”
In strong words, the Vice-President urged a rethink: “Are we not diluting the rule of law? Are we not answerable to ‘We the People’?”
