He maintained that the in-house procedure permits recommendations that amount to punitive outcomes without legislative sanction, which oversteps constitutional boundaries and undermines judicial independence and public confidence.Justice Varma claimed that the committee had adopted a hasty procedure to achieve a pre-determined outcome and had not provided him adequate opportunity to present his case.He raised several unanswered questions: when and how was the cash placed in the outhouse, who placed it, how much was placed, whether the currency was genuine, and the cause of the fire reported at the premises.“The final report dated May 3 provides no answers to these pivotal questions,” he contended.Challenging the procedural fairness, Justice Varma said the committee had failed to notify him of its procedural framework, denied him the opportunity to contribute to the collection of evidence, examined witnesses in his absence, provided only paraphrased statements instead of video recordings, selectively disclosed only incriminating material, and disregarded exculpatory evidence, including CCTV footage, despite his repeated requests.“The committee denied me a personal hearing, contrary to established precedents,” he said.
Source link
