Cash-at-door case: CBI court acquits ex-HC judge Nirmal Yadav after 17 yrs

After 17 years, a CBI court acquits ex-High Court judge Nirmal Yadav in the 2008 'cash-at-door' case, where ₹15 lakh was mistakenly delivered to another judge's home

A special CBI court in Chandigarh on Saturday acquitted retired judge Justice Nirmal Yadav in a 2008 corruption case. The case revolved around a packet containing ₹15 lakh in cash, allegedly meant for Justice Yadav, but mistakenly delivered to the residence of another judge, Justice Nirmaljit Kaur. At the time, Justice Yadav was a sitting judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, reported Bar and Bench.

 

The verdict was pronounced by Special CBI Judge Alka Malik. Other accused in the case were also acquitted.

 

“I have not committed any crime, and there is nothing incriminating found during the entire trial against me,” Justice Yadav (retd) stated in her final remarks.

 

 

The controversial case

 

The case dates back to August 13, 2008, when a clerk at Justice Kaur’s residence received a packet containing ₹15 lakh in cash. The cash was allegedly intended for Justice Yadav but was delivered to Justice Kaur due to their similar-sounding names.

 

Justice Kaur promptly informed the then Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Chandigarh Police, leading to the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) on August 16, 2008. However, just 10 days later, the then UT Administrator, General (Retd) SF Rodrigues, transferred the case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which registered a fresh FIR on August 28, 2008.

 

CBI investigation and trial

 

Investigations revealed that the money was delivered by a clerk working for former Haryana Additional Advocate General Sanjeev Bansal. It was alleged that Bansal later called Justice Kaur, stating that the cash was actually meant for one Nirmal Singh, but had mistakenly reached her residence.

 

In January 2009, the CBI sought permission to prosecute Justice Yadav. The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted sanction in November 2010. Justice Yadav challenged the move but was unsuccessful. The President of India’s office approved the prosecution sanction in March 2011, after which the CBI filed a chargesheet the same month.

 

The prosecution listed 84 witnesses, but only 69 were examined. In February this year, the High Court allowed the CBI to re-examine 10 witnesses within four weeks, directing the trial court to prevent unnecessary adjournments.