B'luru student spends Rs 35 lakhs meant for education, sets house on fire to distract dad, arrested
Bengaluru: A 22-year-old BTech graduate, Ranjith Vivek, was arrested for setting his own house on fire to divert his father’s attention after spending Rs 35 lakhs of the Rs 1.10 crore his father had given him to pursue higher education abroad.
The incident occurred in Hiradahalli village, and initially, police suspected that miscreants had set the house ablaze. However, after reviewing CCTV footage from a nearby camera, the police grew suspicious of Vivek’s movements, as reported by The New Indian Express on Thursday.
Upon questioning, Vivek admitted to the crime, confessing that he had spent the money on gambling and a girl.
He further revealed that he feared his father, Jagannath, a member of Bidarahalli Gram Panchayat in Bengaluru East taluk, would demand the money back. To divert his father’s attention, Vivek decided to set the house on fire.
To execute his plan, Vivek disconnected the CCTV cameras in his home, but he was still caught on a nearby camera. Police revealed that he had purchased 20 liters of petrol in six cans, using four cans to ignite the fire, TNIE added.
At the time of the incident, Vivek, his parents, and sibling were inside the house. Fortunately, they managed to escape unhurt. The family alerted the fire department, but by the time the fire was extinguished, most of the household items had been completely destroyed.
Vivek has been booked under multiple charges, including attempt to murder.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
In-house probe on, proposal to transfer judge separate: Supreme Court
Delhi HC judge Yashwant Varma at centre of "cash-in-home" row
New Delhi, Mar 21 (PTI): Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma was on Friday at the centre of a huge row over reports of alleged cash discovery from his official home here after a fire incident following which its chief justice initiated an in-house inquiry against him and the Supreme Court clarified the move to transfer him was not linked to the probe.
After reports emerged that Justice Varma, 56, was being repatriated to Allahabad High Court in the wake of the alleged cash discovery, the Supreme Court came out with a clarification that the proposal to transfer him was "independent and separate from the in-house enquiry procedure".
Justice Varma, who is the second senior-most judge in the Delhi High Court, was appointed to the court on October 11, 2021.
The purported discovery of the huge stash of cash happened following a fire at Varma's Lutyens Delhi residence at around 11.35 pm on March 14, prompting the Delhi fire department personnel to rush to the spot and douse it. The quantum of the alleged discovered amount was also not known.
The incident was first reported by The Times of India which said that "a fire that broke out in the residential bungalow of Delhi high court judge Justice Yashwant Varma resulted in recovery of a a huge pile of cash forcing the Supreme Court collegium led by CJI Sanjiv Khanna to decide to transfer him to another HC."
In a twist to the unusual development that shocked the judiciary and the legal fraternity, Delhi Fire Services Chief Atul Garg claimed that fire fighters found no cash during their operation at the residence of Justice Varma.
The control room received a call about a blaze at Varma's residence at 11.35 pm on March 14 and two fire tenders were immediately rushed to the spot, Garg told PTI.
Fire tenders reached the spot at 11.43 pm. The fire was in a store room stocked with stationery and domestic articles, Garg said, adding that it took 15 minutes to control the flames. There were no casualties.
"Soon after dousing the flames, we informed police about the fire incident. Thereafter, a team of fire department personnel left the spot. Our fire fighters did not find any cash during their fire fighting operation," the DFS chief said.
The incident created ripples in the legal circuit, with many voices calling for the judge's resignation. Some also criticised the move only to transfer him.
The incident also echoed in the Rajya Sabha.
On Friday, Justice Varma, who is currently heading a division bench dealing with cases of sales tax, GST, company appeals and other appeals of the original side, did not hold court, said his court master.
To put to rest the supposed conjectures, the top court's statement said, "There is misinformation and rumours being spread with regard to the incident at the residence of Justice Yashwant Varma."
While confirming reports that the apex court collegium met to discuss the reported incident at the Delhi residence of Justice Varma, the top court said Delhi High Court Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya would submit a report to Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna today. It was not immediately known whether the report was submitted.
Upon receiving the information about the incident, the apex court said, Justice Upadhyaya "commenced the in-house enquiry procedure collecting evidence and information".
Justice Upadhyaya was stated to have commenced the enquiry prior to the collegium meeting on March 20.
"The report will be examined and processed for further and necessary action," the statement added.
The apex court said the proposal for transfer him was examined by the apex court collegium comprising the CJI and four senior-most judges on March 20, and thereafter letters were sent to the consultee judges of the top court, the chief justices of the high courts concerned apart from Justice Varma.
"Responses received will be examined and, thereupon, the collegium will pass a resolution."
Justice Upadhyaya, while presiding over his bench, expressed shock on the matter.
The chief justice's reaction came when a senior lawyer Arun Bhardwaj mentioned before him that he and many other advocates were pained and shaken by the incident and urged the chief justice to take some steps on the administrative side.
After the lawyer said many in the bar were "shaken" by the development, Justice Upadhyaya lamented, "So is everybody. We are conscious."
The Allahabad High Court Bar Association opposed the "transfer" of Justice Varma, saying it was not a "trash bin".
"We were taken aback that the Supreme Court has transferred Justice Yashwant Varma back to Allahabad High Court...," it said in a resolution.
The resolution, naming association president and senior advocate Anil Tiwari as the signatory, alleged that the discovery of the "unaccounted money" from the judge's house was of "Rs 15 crore".
In the Rajya Sabha, Chairperson Jagdeep Dhankhar said he will find a mechanism for holding a structured discussion on the issue.
Raising the issue, Congress MP Jairam Ramesh sought the Chair's response on judicial accountability and reminded him about a pending notice regarding impeachment of a judge of the Allahabad High Court.
While the Congress said the issue cannot be hushed up by a mere transfer and asserted that it is important to find out whose money it is to maintain the country's faith in the judiciary, the BJP reacted cautiously, saying the party should not comment on the affairs of courts and that the CJI was already seized of the issue.
The incident elicited strong reactions from legal experts who questioned the collegium and demanded Justice Varma's resignation.
While senior advocate Vikas Singh called the matter "very serious" and said the judge should be asked to resign, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi said the apex court should hold an in-house inquiry and ascertain all facts after opportunity to the judge to have his say.
Senior advocate Indira Jaising said the Supreme Court collegium should make a "full, free and frank" disclosure of the facts.
She said it was surprising that the information about the incident, which was alleged to have occurred on March 14, came out only on March 21.
The Delhi High Court website shows Justice Varma enrolled as an advocate on August 8, 1992. He was appointed as an additional judge of the Allahabad High Court on October 13, 2014.
He took oath as a permanent judge of the Allahabad High Court on February 1, 2016.
The top court has an in-house inquiry mechanism in place to deal with allegations against judges of the Constitutional courts.
The procedure entails the CJI, after a preliminary inquiry, forming a committee of three Supreme Court judges to enquire into the matter after seeking the response of the judge concerned.
Based on the report of the panel, further action could be taken.
A judge of a constitutional court can be removed from office only through an impeachment motion passed by Parliament.
No judge has been impeached in India's history. Though some faced proceedings, they resigned before completion.
