CBI seeks sanction to prosecute Nirmal Yadav
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has sought fresh sanction for prosecuting Justice Nirmal Yadav, whose name had figured in a 2008 bribery case. The agency earlier demanded closure of the case. HT reports.chandigarh Updated: Jul 16, 2010 02:56 IST
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has sought fresh sanction for prosecuting Justice Nirmal Yadav, whose name had figured in a 2008 bribery case. The agency earlier demanded closure of the case.
The application was presented before a special CBI judge on Thursday. The court has adjourned the case till September 4.
The bribery scam came to light in August 2008 when Justice Nirmal Kaur of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, reported that a parcel containing Rs 15 lakh was delivered to her by Prakash Kumar, an assistant of former additional advocate general of Haryana Sanjeev Bansal.
Justice Yadav was implicated in the scandal when the Chandigarh police reported that the parcel was intended for her and was mistakenly handed over to Justice Kaur.
While Bansal resigned immediately, Justice Yadav proceeded on leave on moral grounds stating that till the investigation came to an end, she would not resume service.
The probe was later handed over to the CBI, which sought sanction to prosecute Justice Yadav. In her defence, Justice Yadav, who is now the judge of the Uttarakhand High Court, said she was being made a scapegoat because of the similarity of their names.
The CBI confirmed that Justice Yadav had received the amount in return for having "favourably decided" a legal case of Bansal at the high court.
Despite the obvious case of bribery, the attorney general denied sanction to prosecute Yadav. In December, the CBI demanded the case be closed.
But on March 26, special CBI judge Darshan Singh declined to accept the closure report and blasted the probe agency for seeking closure on the basis of a "half-baked and self-contradictory" report.
Singh sent the case for further probe, saying, "The CBI is required to come to the court with a clear stand and not be ambiguous and contradictory."
First Published: Jul 15, 2010 23:34 IST