Nirmal Yadav's plea dismissed by High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court today dismissed a plea of its former Judge Nirmal Yadav challenging grant of sanction for her prosecution in the 2008 cash-at-judge's door case, observing that she cannot claim any special right merely because she had occupied the high constitutional office.

Justice Permod Kohli rejected the petition filed by Justice Yadav under Section 482 of CrPC, in which she had also sought quashing of the charge sheet filed by CBI against against her,

The chargesheet was filed by the agency in the Special CBI Court on March 4, a day after Justice Yadav, then posted as Judge of the Uttrakhand High Court, retired.

The President had granted prosecution sanction on March 1 this year.

Pronouncing the 55-page order in the open court, Justice Permod Kohli held that merely because the petitioner has enjoyed one of the highest constitutional offices, she cannot claim any special right or privilege as an accused than prescribed under law.

"Rule of law has to prevail and must prevail equally and uniformly, irrespective of the status of an individual...,"  the Judge observed.

Yadav's counsel and senior advocate KTS Tulsi had earlier contended that once the then Chief Justice of India (CJI) KG Balakrishnan had denied prosecution sanction, the present CJI SH Kapadia had no power to review the decision and grant a fresh sanction.

He had maintained in the court that the issue of sanction for prosecution "once decided attains finality and he (present CJI) has no powers to review or reconsider it".

However, Justice Kohli observed that there was no order by former CJI Balakrishnan declining the sanction.

The Judge observed that the record confirmed that Justice Kapadia had examined the question of sanction for prosecution for the first time and it had not been examined by Justice Balakrishnan earlier.

According to Anupam Gupta, Special Public Prosecutor for CBI, the High Court here had summoned records from CBI, Central Government and the Law Ministry.

While maintaining that there was no question of any review, Justice Kohli also mentioned that even otherwise the CBI did produce fresh evidence as directed.

Regarding information sought by Yadav seeking disclosure of notings regarding her prosecution sanction in the case, the Judge observed that the accused has no right to access records before charges are framed by the trial court and added that she can apply for the same in the trial court later.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court was rocked by controversy after a sum of Rs 15 lakh was wrongly delivered at the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, another judge of the High Court here, on August 13, 2008, following which she reported the matter to Chandigarh Police.

The money, allegedly meant for Yadav, was said to have been delivered to Justice Kaur due to confusion over their names.

Yadav had denied the allegation that the money was meant for her.

An FIR was registered on August 13, 2008 under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act against Justice Yadav on a complaint of peon of High Court Judge, Justice Nirmaljit Kaur.

Initially, the case was investigated by Chandigarh Police and was subsequently transferred to CBI by the then Governor of Punjab and Administrator of Chandigarh.

The in-house committee constituted by the then CJI had also drawn an inference that money delivered at the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur was infact meant for Justice Yadav.

Earlier, CBI had filed closure report in the cash-at-judge's door case on ground of prosecution sanction being declined, but special Judge CBI refused to accept the closure report and on approaching again by CBI, the President granted sanction for prosecution and consequently a charge sheet was filed in the CBI Court.

On August 27, Yadav had appeared for the first time before the CBI Special Court hearing the case and was granted bail after furnishing a bond of Rs 25,000.

The CBI had on March 4 filed a charge sheet against Yadav and four others for alleged criminal conspiracy and corruption in the scam.

The others include advocate Sanjeev Bansal, Delhi based hotelier Ravinder Singh Bhasin, Chandigarh-based businessman Rajiv Gupta and Nirmal Singh.