The Hindu : National : I will not be on Bench hearing ‘judges scam’: CJI

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Jul 18, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

National

National

I will not be on Bench hearing ‘judges scam’: CJI

J. Venkatesan

Counsel protests order seeking written police questions for judges

CJI could not take administrative decision and hear it on judicial side: Shanthi Bhushan
I don’t want advice on administrative matters, Balakrishnan tells him

New Delhi: The Supreme Court ordered notice to the Centre, the Uttar Pradesh Chief Secretary and its Principal Secretary (Home) on Thursday, on a petition seeking a CBI probe into what is called the “Ghaziabad judges scam.”

Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, however, made it clear that he would not in future be part of the Bench hearing the matter.

The scam allegedly involved 26 judges (one apex court judge, seven High Court judges, six retired High Court judges, 10 serving district judges and two retired district judges).

Senior counsel Shanthi Bhushan, appearing for Transparency International, took exception to the Supreme Court Secretary-General writing to the Ghaziabad police to submit written questions which were proposed to be asked to each of these judges.

The Chief Justice said: “The SSP sought my permission and I have taken the decision. If you want to challenge it you can do so. For this you have to amend your prayer. Somebody else [other Bench] will hear it. Neither the Secretary-General nor I have any control over the Ghaziabad court staff or the judicial officers. Only the [Allahabad] High Court Chief Justice has control over them. I don’t want any advice from you on administrative matters.”

Mr. Bhushan, however, said there could not be any different treatment for lower-level staff and judicial officers or judges, all of whom should be investigated similarly.

He said the Chief Justice could not take an administrative decision and hear it on the judicial side.

Justice Balakrishnan said: “If you are challenging the order [seeking written questions to be forwarded to the judges concerned] passed by me on the administrative side, then I will not hear the case.”

The petitioners — Nahar Singh Yadav, advocate and chairman of the Adhivakta Kalyan Trust, and the Bar Association of Ghaziabad, through its chairman Devendra Sharma — said the case related to alleged misappropriation of Rs. 23 crore of provident fund of Class-IV employees with the “connivance” of officials and judges.

Senior counsel Anil Divan, who along with M.N. Krishnamani appeared for the petitioners, said there must be a CBI probe to lend credibility and inspire public confidence.

No one, however, highly placed should be spared and there should be no cover-up. The investigating agency or team should have a free hand as large public funds under the control of the Ghaziabad judgeship over a long period were allegedly misappropriated and misused.

Wrong signals

Solicitor-General G.E. Vahanvati, appearing for the Centre, said: “There can be no cover-up. But since the matter was being monitored by the Allahabad High Court, which had issued several directions, it should continue to monitor the investigation.” The Supreme Court hearing the matter directly would send wrong signals, he said.

Criminal case

The Chief Justice, heading a Bench which included Justices P. Sathasivam and J.M. Panchal, rejected a suggestion for ordering an investigation by a senior retired police officer or directing a probe under the supervision of any such officer.

“This is a criminal case with a serious ramification. We have to find a competent officer to investigate it.”

The Bench, while seeking the response of the Centre and the Uttar Pradesh government, posted the case to August 1.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National