Published: Monday, Oct 18, 2010, 2:19 IST
By Harish Gupta | Place: New Delhi | Agency: DNA http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_centre-reopens-cash-at-judge-s-door-case-against-nirmal-yadav_1454163
In a development that is bound to cause acute embarrassment to Karnataka governor and former law minister HR Bhardwaj, the Centre has reopened the ‘cash-at-judge’s door’ case involving former Punjab and Haryana high court judge Nirmal Yadav.
The case was presumed closed, but it is authoritatively learnt that Bhardwaj’s successor M Veerappa Moily quietly dug out files in the law ministry containing CBI’s findings, opinions given by a three-judge inquiry panel, director of prosecution (CBI) SK Sharma and former attorney-general Milon Banerjee.
Yadav was transferred to the Uttarakhand high court a few months ago.
It is learnt that while CBI stood its ground that Yadav was involved in corruption, Sharma and Banerjee said no case was made out against the judge.
Sharma’s successor said the case was fit for prosecution as evidence of purchase of a plot and delivery of cash was very strong. Attorney-general GE Vahanvati also recommended prosecution.
The three-judge committee found merit in the complaint against Yadav, but did not find favour with the Supreme Court collegium headed by then chief justice KG Balakrishnan.
Sources in the government said the matter has now been sent to Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia for review.
Kapadia has sent strong signals that he would brook no corruption and Moily is on the same page with him.
It may be mentioned here that Yadav was transferred after almost two years of internal inquiries conducted by CBI and the judges’ committee after Rs15 lakh was found at the door of another Punjab and Haryana high court judge Nirmaljit Kaur in August 2008.
The deliverer of the cash, it later emerged, had got confused over the names of the two women judges.
Yadav did not attend court work after allegations against her surfaced in August 2008. It was later decided to transfer her outside Chandigarh.
The case was reopened after a large section of the legal fraternity asked the governmenthow could justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta high court be punished for misuse of a small amount before he became a judge and another judge be given relief.
