Cash for judge but offender was granted sympathy. Whether it is justified.

Chandigarh, Feb 15
(IANS) A court here Saturday exempted former high court judge Nirmal Yadav from
personal appearance in a corruption case against her and four others. Whether C.B.I. special court has special sympathy with the
former judge of High court. Whether former High court judge can’t be treated
like ordinary offenders even when constitution quotes that every one is alike
before the law of land. Why C.B.I. court is showing special sympathy to former
judge whether any provision of law of land frees the former judge to face the
trial like ordinary offenders.
   It however, said that she will have to
appear whenever directed to do so. When public
spirited individuals will raise fingers on this discrimination ,then court will
ask for attendance. Think about those public spirited individuals who faced
false trials throughout their life instituted in order to teach them lesson.  
Charges of corruption were framed Jan 18 against Yadav, a former
judge of the Uttarakhand High Court, by a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
special court here in the multi-million rupee “cash-for-judge” scam.
Charges were also framed against four other people – Delhi-based
hotelier Ravinder Singh, Haryana’s former additional advocate general Sanjiv
Bansal, Panchkula-based businessman Rajiv Gupta and another person Nirmal
Singh.
When the trial began here Saturday, Yadav sought an order from the
court on her application for exemption from personal hearing owing to health
reasons. The court allowed her that with conditions.
Yadav, who was a judge in the Punjab and Haryana High Court here
earlier, and others are facing trial for corruption. The trial will now begin
March 17.
The scam came
to light after a packet containing Rs.15 lakh cash was delivered Aug 13, 2008,
at the Sector 11 residence of newly-appointed high court judge, Nirmaljit Kaur.
She complained to police and got a case registered.
Police investigations later revealed that the money was
meant for Justice Nirmal Yadav but was delivered to the other woman judge’s
house by mistake. This matter itself revealing
the truth of judiciary and its real face before the countrymen.
Yadav was a sitting judge then.
The CBI had booked Yadav and others under various sections of the
Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act. A case was registered
by the Chandigarh Police initially and later the investigation was handed over
to the CBI.
Yadav had tried
her best to get out of the case but her pleas were rejected by the high court
and the Supreme Court.
Despite objections from Yadav, the Supreme Court had set up an
independent enquiry into the case. The Punjab and Haryana High Court later, in
2011, directed Yadav to appear before the trial court.
Yadav was later transferred to the Uttarakhand High Court
from where she retired in 2012. The charges
against the former High court judge is of serious nature and because of her
indulgence in corruption as alleged ,lowered the dignity of court.
The CBI had
filed a charge sheet against Yadav for corruption, conspiracy, destruction of
evidence and creation of false evidence.

2 comments on Cash for judge but offender was granted sympathy. Whether it is justified.

  1. The scam came to light after a packet containing Rs.15 lakh cash was delivered Aug 13, 2008, at the Sector 11 residence of newly-appointed high court judge, Nirmaljit Kaur. She complained to police and got a case registered.The CBI had filed a charge sheet against Yadav for corruption, conspiracy, destruction of evidence and creation of false evidence.Whether C.B.I. special court has special sympathy with the former judge of High court. Whether former High court judge can't be treated like ordinary offenders even when constitution quotes that every one is alike before the law of land. Why C.B.I. court is showing special sympathy to former judge whether any provision of law of land frees the former judge to face the trial like ordinary offenders.

  2. Few former and incumbent C.J.I. accepted irregularity in the judiciary but not even judicial accountability bill could be passed by our law makers.Our accountable functionaries itself plays negative role and worried to much that their wrongdoings coming to public domain.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: