SlideShare uma empresa Scribd logo
1 de 1
Baixar para ler offline
CASH SCAM
             CBI submits report on Yadav, may seek
                       to prosecute her
                      R. Sedhuraman/Legal Correspondent

New Delhi, January 23
The CBI today said it had submitted its investigation report on the cash-for-judge
scam involving Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Nirmal Yadav to the Supreme
Court and the Centre amid speculation that the investigating agency had
recommended action against her.

"The report has been sent to the Chief Justice of India (K.G. Balakrishnan) and the
Ministry of Personnel upon completion of the investigation," a CBI spokesman
confirmed, but refused to divulge the contents.

The CJI has already served notice on Justice Yadav, asking her to show cause as to
why action cannot be taken against her for her alleged involvement in the August 13,
2008 scam.

The notice was issued last month in the light of the report of a three-judge
committee set by him to go into the issue separately in addition to the CBI probe
ordered by Punjab Governor SFR Rodrigues in consultation with HC Chief Justice
Tirath Singh Thakur.

In her response to the notice, Justice Yadav had denied receiving the money and
asked for all the documents (preferably by January 14), based on which the charges
were levelled against her.

The committee comprising Chief Justices Hemant Laxman Gokhale of the Allahabad
High Court and KS Radhakrishnan of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court and Delhi
High Court judge Madan B Lokur had submitted its report to the CJI on December
12, apparently indicting her.

The case pertains to allegations that a bribe of Rs 15 lakh meant for Justice Yadav
was by mistake delivered at the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur. Justice Nirmaljit
Kaur had lodged a police complaint on August 13, stating that senior Haryana law
officer Sanjeev Bansal had delivered the cash. The case was subsequently handed
over to the CBI.

It has also been alleged that another suitcase containing Rs 15 lakh was delivered to
Justice Yadav the following day (August 14).

Law Ministry sources said the CBI's request for permission to prosecute the tainted
judge would be forwarded to Rashtrapati Bhavan as the President is the appointing
authority whose consent is necessary for proceeding against such constitutional
functionaries.

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais de JudicialReform13

Contempt of justice_outlook
Contempt of justice_outlookContempt of justice_outlook
Contempt of justice_outlookJudicialReform13
 
Completely collaspsed system
Completely collaspsed systemCompletely collaspsed system
Completely collaspsed systemJudicialReform13
 
Complaint to y.k.sab re jagdish bhalla
Complaint to y.k.sab re jagdish bhallaComplaint to y.k.sab re jagdish bhalla
Complaint to y.k.sab re jagdish bhallaJudicialReform13
 
Cnn govt forced_to_withdraw_judges_assets_bill_in_rs
Cnn govt forced_to_withdraw_judges_assets_bill_in_rsCnn govt forced_to_withdraw_judges_assets_bill_in_rs
Cnn govt forced_to_withdraw_judges_assets_bill_in_rsJudicialReform13
 
Cji rules out_declaration_of_assests
Cji rules out_declaration_of_assestsCji rules out_declaration_of_assests
Cji rules out_declaration_of_assestsJudicialReform13
 
Cji not exempt_from_rti_purview_toi
Cji not exempt_from_rti_purview_toiCji not exempt_from_rti_purview_toi
Cji not exempt_from_rti_purview_toiJudicialReform13
 
Cjar letter to_vice_president
Cjar letter to_vice_presidentCjar letter to_vice_president
Cjar letter to_vice_presidentJudicialReform13
 
Cjar complaint against_rebello
Cjar complaint against_rebelloCjar complaint against_rebello
Cjar complaint against_rebelloJudicialReform13
 
Cic judgement appointments_1
Cic judgement appointments_1Cic judgement appointments_1
Cic judgement appointments_1JudicialReform13
 

Mais de JudicialReform13 (20)

Contempt power some_quest
Contempt power some_questContempt power some_quest
Contempt power some_quest
 
Contempt of justice_outlook
Contempt of justice_outlookContempt of justice_outlook
Contempt of justice_outlook
 
Contempt article pb
Contempt article pbContempt article pb
Contempt article pb
 
Completely collaspsed system
Completely collaspsed systemCompletely collaspsed system
Completely collaspsed system
 
Complaint to y.k.sab re jagdish bhalla
Complaint to y.k.sab re jagdish bhallaComplaint to y.k.sab re jagdish bhalla
Complaint to y.k.sab re jagdish bhalla
 
Coja resolution 22.9.01
Coja resolution 22.9.01Coja resolution 22.9.01
Coja resolution 22.9.01
 
Coja resolution 13.12.02
Coja resolution 13.12.02Coja resolution 13.12.02
Coja resolution 13.12.02
 
Cnn govt forced_to_withdraw_judges_assets_bill_in_rs
Cnn govt forced_to_withdraw_judges_assets_bill_in_rsCnn govt forced_to_withdraw_judges_assets_bill_in_rs
Cnn govt forced_to_withdraw_judges_assets_bill_in_rs
 
Cjirefuted
CjirefutedCjirefuted
Cjirefuted
 
Cji silence
Cji silenceCji silence
Cji silence
 
Cji rules out_declaration_of_assests
Cji rules out_declaration_of_assestsCji rules out_declaration_of_assests
Cji rules out_declaration_of_assests
 
Cji recomends impreach_ie
Cji recomends impreach_ieCji recomends impreach_ie
Cji recomends impreach_ie
 
Cji not exempt_from_rti_purview_toi
Cji not exempt_from_rti_purview_toiCji not exempt_from_rti_purview_toi
Cji not exempt_from_rti_purview_toi
 
Cjar letter to_vice_president
Cjar letter to_vice_presidentCjar letter to_vice_president
Cjar letter to_vice_president
 
Cjar complaint against_rebello
Cjar complaint against_rebelloCjar complaint against_rebello
Cjar complaint against_rebello
 
Cjar brochure
Cjar brochureCjar brochure
Cjar brochure
 
Cja comments on bill
Cja   comments on billCja   comments on bill
Cja comments on bill
 
Cic decision hc_rtifees_2
Cic decision hc_rtifees_2Cic decision hc_rtifees_2
Cic decision hc_rtifees_2
 
Cic decision hc_rtifees_
Cic decision hc_rtifees_Cic decision hc_rtifees_
Cic decision hc_rtifees_
 
Cic judgement appointments_1
Cic judgement appointments_1Cic judgement appointments_1
Cic judgement appointments_1
 

Cbi submits report

  • 1. CASH SCAM CBI submits report on Yadav, may seek to prosecute her R. Sedhuraman/Legal Correspondent New Delhi, January 23 The CBI today said it had submitted its investigation report on the cash-for-judge scam involving Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Nirmal Yadav to the Supreme Court and the Centre amid speculation that the investigating agency had recommended action against her. "The report has been sent to the Chief Justice of India (K.G. Balakrishnan) and the Ministry of Personnel upon completion of the investigation," a CBI spokesman confirmed, but refused to divulge the contents. The CJI has already served notice on Justice Yadav, asking her to show cause as to why action cannot be taken against her for her alleged involvement in the August 13, 2008 scam. The notice was issued last month in the light of the report of a three-judge committee set by him to go into the issue separately in addition to the CBI probe ordered by Punjab Governor SFR Rodrigues in consultation with HC Chief Justice Tirath Singh Thakur. In her response to the notice, Justice Yadav had denied receiving the money and asked for all the documents (preferably by January 14), based on which the charges were levelled against her. The committee comprising Chief Justices Hemant Laxman Gokhale of the Allahabad High Court and KS Radhakrishnan of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court and Delhi High Court judge Madan B Lokur had submitted its report to the CJI on December 12, apparently indicting her. The case pertains to allegations that a bribe of Rs 15 lakh meant for Justice Yadav was by mistake delivered at the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur had lodged a police complaint on August 13, stating that senior Haryana law officer Sanjeev Bansal had delivered the cash. The case was subsequently handed over to the CBI. It has also been alleged that another suitcase containing Rs 15 lakh was delivered to Justice Yadav the following day (August 14). Law Ministry sources said the CBI's request for permission to prosecute the tainted judge would be forwarded to Rashtrapati Bhavan as the President is the appointing authority whose consent is necessary for proceeding against such constitutional functionaries.