Cash-at-door: CBI court defers framing of charges against Justice Nirmal Yadav
Cash-at-door: CBI court defers framing of charges against Justice Nirmal Yadav
A special CBI court on Monday deferred framing of charges against former Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Nirmal Yadav in the 2008 'cash-at judge's door' case, with the agency terming her plea for exemption from personal appearance on health grounds as a "sham".

A special CBI court on Monday deferred framing of charges against former Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Nirmal Yadav in the 2008 'cash-at judge's door' case, with the agency terming her plea for exemption from personal appearance on health grounds as a "sham".

While the rest of the accused, barring Justice Yadav, were present in the court on Monday, special CBI public prosecutor Anupam Gupta strongly opposed the application moved by Yadav's counsel on her behalf, seeking exemption from personal appearance on the health grounds.

"The plea of ill health or illness is a sham, it is a pretence and an enquiry should be ordered against the doctors who have granted any medical certificate to Justice Yadav," Gupta said. "Justice Yadav is acting as if she is above the law. A former High Court judge is not expected to obstruct the administration of justice in this fashion," he said.

The court allowed Justice Yadav two weeks time after which the case was adjourned to August 27 for framing of charges. All the accused were directed to appear personally on that date. Justice Yadav abstained from personally appearing in the court on previous hearing on July 31, citing health reasons.

Special CBI Judge Vimal Kumar had made it clear that all the accused involved in the case will be charged as per the chargesheet filed by CBI in March 2011 and the actual framing of charges against them was supposed to take place on Monday.

Meanwhile, responding to the oral plea by the counsel of the accused that they need some time to challenge the Special Judge's order of July 31 in the High Court, Gupta said, "It is their right to challenge the order in the HC, but the framing of charges cannot be deferred for that reason."

What's your reaction?

Comments

https://sharpss.com/assets/images/user-avatar-s.jpg

0 comment

Write the first comment for this!