The Punjab and Haryana High Court has had a history of hushing up cases originating from its judicial chambers, so the Justice Nirmal Yadav case evokes a sense of deja vu. Skeletons pop out with sickening regularity but very little action is ever taken. A few months before the cash-for-judge scam, the Vigilance Bureau submitted to the Punjab governor and the chief justice of the high court six reports between April 30 and July 25, ’08, which detailed serious malpractices in appointments in the judiciary, manipulations of the high court registry, fixing of cases and similar malpractices in the lower courts. The governor handed over the explosive material to the home ministry, while the then HC chief justice Vijendra Jain, sent it to the Chief Justice of India.
The Vigilance Bureau had stumbled on the goings-on while investigating a criminal case which required that the telephones of two people in Punjab be tapped. The names of two judges of the high court—Justice Mehtab Singh Gill and Justice H.S. Bhalla—and an additional district judge of Ferozepur, J.S. Bhinder, figured in the reports signed by Vigilance Bureau director Sumedh Singh Saini. The bureau is still awaiting sanction to proceed in the matter.
Law less The Vigilance Bureau report citing the illegal goings-on in the HC
What the bureau reports uncovered besides the alleged role of touts, advocates and judges in fixing cases and “manipulating” the registry of the high court, was the “going rates” for various tasks. For instance, according to one of the tapped conversations, Rs 15 lakh was the rate for getting an immediate stay, of which Rs 10 lakh would go to “wade sahib”. To get a favourable verdict, a sum of Rs 25 lakh was considered kosher. To manipulate the HC registry to get a particular case before a particular bench, Rs 25,000 is the rate. Rates discussed and quoted for appointments to the post of additional district judge range from Rs 35-50 lakh.
Curiously, as soon as Justice Jain retired, the reports went missing from the high court. When the new Chief Justice Tirath Singh Thakur wanted to look at them, he had to ask for a fresh copy from the Punjab government.
Dear Vikas Goel, now when Mr H S Bhalla is facing the charge of murdering his wife to marry his lady love and Mr S S Saini survived his post, do you still call me an ignorant fool. Ravinder Singal 09814932456
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT