Justice Varma probe: Was the question of how the fire started left unanswered?

New Delhi, May 30 (IANS) Following the submission of the three-member judicial probe panel’s report into the March 14 incident at Justice Yashwant Varma’s official residence in New Delhi, certain crucial questions remain unanswered, most notably, the cause of the fire that triggered the entire sequence of events, say sources.

Informed sources close to the matter have expressed concern that this key aspect has not been examined in the fact-finding exercise.

The panel, constituted by then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna on March 22, was tasked with probing the fire and ‘burnt cash’ from the outhouse at the premises of residence occupied by Justice Varma at 30, Tughlak Crescent in New Delhi following a fire outbreak.

While the report has been submitted to the then-CJI Khanna, some legal analysts note that the origin and nature of the fire, an incident which led to the discovery of the cash, were not independently investigated or addressed with the rigour expected in such a sensitive matter.

According to sources, Justice Varma had placed considerable faith in the judicial process and anticipated that the inquiry would naturally extend to the cause of the fire.

This expectation was rooted in the fact that, at the initial stage, there were references, even at high levels, to the possibility of arson, sources added.

Given the serious implications of such a possibility, it was assumed that a thorough investigation into the fire’s origin would form an integral part of the inquiry’s mandate, sources added.

However, the committee's report, as described by those familiar with its findings, states that the responsibility to have an investigation into the fire initiated was that of the judge himself.

Remarkably, while fire department personnel were called upon to depose before the panel, sources say that none were questioned specifically about whether any investigation had been undertaken into the cause of the fire. As a result, the opportunity was missed to clarify whether the fire was accidental, deliberate, or otherwise suspicious in nature, say sources.

Justice Varma, sources suggest, remained cooperative throughout the proceedings and refrained from speculative assertions. Instead, he consistently urged that the inquiry explore all relevant facts, including how the fire began and whether it might be linked to the subsequent recovery of currency, sources pointed out.

While the panel’s efforts in handling a complex and delicate matter are acknowledged and respected, some voices within the legal fraternity believe that a fuller picture, especially concerning the fire’s origin, would have strengthened the comprehensiveness of the findings, say sources.

--IANS

brt/dan