Cash-at-door scam: Supreme Court dismisses former judge Nirmal Yadav's petition
- LIVE: Rahul Gandhi returns to Delhi from sabbatical
- The two critical by-poll results which were overlooked
- 80 crore youth, 160 crore strong hands. What can we not achieve?
- Corporate war between media house, operator confounding net neutrality debate: TRAI chief Rahul Khullar
- Military institute student to son of ex-judge, Islamic State taps Dhaka gen-next
The Supreme Court on Friday paved the way for framing of charges against former Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Nirmal Yadav as it dismissed her petition to stall the trial proceedings in the 2008 cash-at-door scam. A bench led by Justice H L Dattu said that there should be no interference at the stage of framing of charges against Yadav and four other co-accused in the case.
The court pointed out that the case was of 2008 and there should not be further delay in the trial. The special CBI court had recently summoned Yadav and other accused in the case for framing of charges against them for Tuesday following which Justice Yadav had approached the High Court seeking stay on trial court's order.
However, on Friday, the Punjab and Haryana High Court had refused to stay the cash-at-judge's door trial while dismissing an application filed by its former Judge, Justice Yadav, who had sought a stay on the trial in the special CBI court at Chandigarh for framing of charges in the case.
The High Court had also turned down Yadav's request to grant two weeks time to challenge the order in the Supreme Court and asked her to put the same request before the special CBI court.
On July 31, the CBI court in Chandigarh had ordered the framing of charges against Justice Yadav for corruption while accepting in its entirety the charge sheet filed by the CBI against her and other co-accused on March 4, 2011.
The court had also ordered framing of charges against advocate Sanjeev Bansal, who had earlier served as Additional Advocate General, Haryana, Delhi-based hotelier Ravinder Singh, city-based businessmen Rajiv Gupta and Nirmal Singh under various Sections of the IPC including 120 B (criminal conspiracy).
The CBI held that justice Yadav had committed an offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The case had hit headlines after a packet containing Rs 15 lakh was allegedly wrongly delivered at residence of Nirmaljit Kaur, who was also High Court judge, in 2008.