Dinakaran case: CJI to name panel head

January 02, 2010 12:49 am | Updated December 16, 2016 03:03 pm IST - NEW DELHI

NEW DELHI, 24/10/2009: Karnataka High Court Chief justice P D Dinakaran at the National Consultation for Strengtening the Judiciary Toweards Reducing Pendency and Delays,  in New Delhi on October 24, 2009.  Photo: V.Sudershan

NEW DELHI, 24/10/2009: Karnataka High Court Chief justice P D Dinakaran at the National Consultation for Strengtening the Judiciary Toweards Reducing Pendency and Delays, in New Delhi on October 24, 2009. Photo: V.Sudershan

The Rajya Sabha Secretariat has requested Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan to suggest the name of a Supreme Court judge to head a three-member team to probe allegations against Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court P.D. Dinakaran contained in the motion seeking his removal under the Judges Inquiry Act.

The committee will comprise a Supreme Court judge, the Chief Justice of a High Court and an eminent jurist.

Informed sources told The Hindu that Justice Balakrishnan had already initiated the process of consultation to select the Supreme Court judge. The names of all the three committee members would be decided next week, they said.

The committee will probe the charges after giving Justice Dinakaran an opportunity to defend himself. Thereafter, it will submit a report to Rajya Sabha Chairman Hamid Ansari.

The motion admitted in the Rajya Sabha lists the following allegations: possessing wealth disproportionate to the known sources of his income; unlawfully securing five housing board plots, in favour of his wife and two daughters; entering into benami transactions prohibited and punishable under the Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act, 1988; acquiring agricultural holding beyond the ceiling set by the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961; illegal encroachment on government and public property to deprive Dalits and the poor of their right to livelihood; violation of the human rights of Dalits and the poor; destruction of evidence during official enquiry; obstructing public servant on duty; repeated undervaluation of property at the time of sale registration to evade stamp duty; illegal construction in breach of the town planning law and planning permit; misuse of official position to unlawfully secure property and facilitate other illegal acts for personal gain; and abuse of judicial office to pass dishonest judicial orders.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.