Hearing in Nirmal Yadav case on April 29
A special CBI court today adjourned the hearing in the cash at judge's door case for arguments on framing of charges against former Punjab and Haryana high court judge Nirmal Yadav and other accused to April 29.chandigarh Updated: Apr 08, 2012 15:39 IST
A special CBI court, on Saturday, adjourned the hearing in the cash at judge's door case for arguments on framing of charges against former Punjab and Haryana high court judge Nirmal Yadav and other accused to April 29.
Yadav appeared before special CBI judge Vimal Kumar and sought exemption from personal hearing on the grounds that the court was busy hearing the arguments on the appointment of Advocate Anupam Gupta as a special public prosecutor in the case.
Yadav's lawyer filed an application in the court, stating, "Since presently arguments are being advanced on the issue of appointment of Gupta and not on the framing of charges, my client be granted exemption from hearing."
One of the co-accused, Ravinder Singh, also filed an application seeking exemption from hearing till the framing of charges. "I am suffering a huge business loss as I have to travel all the way from Delhi for hearing. Presently, arguments are being advanced on Gupta's appointment," the application said.
After going through the two applications, the CBI judge adjourned the hearing to April 29.
After hearing the arguments on Gupta's appointment in the case, challenged by Sanjeev Bansal, a co-accused and former additional advocate general, the court adjourned the hearing for pronouncing the order on the application challenging the appointment to April 10.
During the resumed hearing of the arguments on Gupta's appointment, Bansal cited at least 12 judgments delivered by the Supreme Court in the past 30-40 years on "judicial bias" in cases relating to judges.
While Bansal was citing the judgments, Vimal Kumar intervened, saying, "Please do not repeat the arguments which you have already advanced as the court's time is precious."
Bansal, who argued for nearly four hours, seemed lacking in confidence, unlike on March 10 when he had, for the first time, presented the arguments on the application challenging Gupta's appointment.
Bansal concluded his arguments by saying, "Now in any case Gupta will be biased since I have questioned his appointment."
Gupta sought nearly half an hour to respond to Bansal's arguments.