| Font Size |
Sources in the Justice Ministry told The Indian Express that following a request by the CBI, CJI S H Kapadia gave the agency the go-ahead.
An in-house committee, constituted by previous CJI K G Balakrishanan, had concluded that a packet of Rs 15 lakh, which was delivered to the residence of another judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, on August 13, 2008, was actually meant for Justice Yadav.
Justice Yadav, who was shifted to the Uttarakhand High Court in February this year, has denied all allegations in this regard.
Last year, the Law Ministry had given Justice Yadav a clean chit on the advice of previous Attorney General Milon Banerjee who said that the agency did not have evidence to prosecute Justice Yadav in the case.
As for the CBI’s case under Section 8 (taking gratification to influence public servants) and Section 9 (taking gratification to exercise personal influence) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code, the Law Ministry had gone with the opinion of the AG that the agency had exceeded its jurisdiction by investigating aspects for which it had not received necessary sanction.
In his opinion to the CBI, Attorney General G E Vahanvati had said the CBI had not been granted sanction for prosecution of Justice Yadav in respect of land deals in which she was allegedly involved.
But the CBI has been maintaining that during the course of its investigation into the cash-at-door scandal, it came across a land deal and other property details of the judge. The plot measuring 11.1 bighas in Solan district of Himachal Pradesh is owned by the judge and some of her kin, including her brother, Haryana Finance Minister Capt Ajay Singh Yadav.
On July 15, the agency’s lawyer told a court in Chandigarh that it had sought fresh sanction for prosecuting Justice Yadav.
Discuss this story on expressindia forums
|
|
Judges are the product of the same society, culture and environment that produces you and I. Our politicians and bureucrats are corrupt too. This is who we are, this is what we get because that is what we deserve. Either we drastically change the whole system or live with it. Judges are not saints. They have the same temptations and greed that prevail in our society in every sphere at every level.
But,my dear friend,every member of society is not authorise to pass death sentense.
Welcome move. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the prosecution of Justice Nirmal Yadav will do more to ensure judicial accountability than endless debates about the new institutions which need to be set up. The present law of the land to deal with deviant behaviour by public functionaries is good enough, just allow it to work.
It is very much distressing to note to what level the Judiciary in democratic India has stooped.There was a Chief Justice of Supreme court in India who could dilute the law of interpretation to such an extent that it freed a foreign national from the clutches death penalty/life imprisonment so much so the foreign country now declares that the criminal case against Warren Anderson cannot be reopened now at this distance of time. What was the consideration which made the C.J of India to dlute Indian Criminal Law?. Then we have another CJ of Karnataka who is alleged to have have grabbed land and accumulated wealth disproportionate to his known Income and facing impeachment We have another case of Justice Ramaswamy whose impeachment failed in Loksabha, Now we have Mr. Justice Yadav in whose case the Law Ministry did not find any case of bribery and opined CBI failed to take prior sanction to book him! The Indian Judicial system becomes a mockery in the eyes of world judiciary!!!!
After interval, the show is going to start again.Let us see what new ups and downs take place.The judge continues denying any wrong doing.The prosecution insists with the charge.Let both the sides have a day in the court to prove their version of the story. Let the truth prevail. To avoid such situations in future,let the SC revisit its judgment and either take over the responsibility of removal,as well or constitute National and State judicial Councils involving all the stake holders. Let there be nominees of the legislature,executive,bench and bar, both at the National and State level.Let the appointment,promotion based on performance and removal rest with such judicial councils.In case SC fails to act,then Parliament,is requested to step in.Image of the institution and of the individuals running it is at stake.Since judiciary is the last hope of the litigants,we request that transparency and accountability be enforced till new system takes over.Let rule of law and not man prevails