Could You Be Judged

• An apex court judge was supplied expensive crockery, furniture, towels, bedsheets and a laptop.
  
• A Calcutta HC judge was given a washing machine and a 29-inch TV
  
• An HC judge received a TV, fridge, AC, microwave oven, ceiling fans, crockery and furniture. Cars were also hired for visits to Noida.
  
• An Allahabad HC judge was given expensive crockery. His son received Rs 1 lakh worth of furniture.
  
• An HC judge was given two ACs for his Noida house. He was also provided taxis during private visits and cars were hired for his son's marriage.

• On August 13, additional advocate general, Haryana, Sanjay Bansal, sent Rs 15 lakh to Justice Nirmal Yadav of the Punjab & Haryana High Court.
  
• By mistake, the money was delivered to Justice Nirmaljit Kaur.
  
• Bhansal has confessed that the money was sent on behalf of Delhi hotelier, Ravinder Singh Bhasin. He revealed that another Rs 15 lakh was sent on August 14 to Justice Yadav to buy land in Solan.
  
• The Chief Justice of India (CJI) has given the go-ahead to the CBI to question the two judges.

• The CJI has recommended the impeachment of Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court.
  
• As court receiver, the judge had collected Rs 24.57 lakh between 1993-1995. Less Rs 811.56, the entire money was transferred to his personal account.

***

The allegations against them are shocking to say the least. Investigations reveal that between 2003-2007 over Rs 23 crore was systematically siphoned off by these officials from the general provident fund of Class III and IV employees of the Ghaziabad court. The money was allegedly used to procure expensive gifts—TVs, laptops, ACs, big screen projectors—and provide other services to judges and court officials posted across the country.

Special judge Jain's investigations have come at a time when the judiciary's integrity is already under severe strain from two unrelated events. In Chandigarh, news of a botched attempt to allegedly "bribe" a lady judge of the Punjab and Haryana HC sent shock waves through legal circles. In an unprecedented move last week, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Justice K.G. Balakrishnan gave the CBI the go-ahead to question two HC judges in the case. Earlier, the CJI had recommended the impeachment of Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High court for transferring to his personal account Rs 24.57 lakh kept in his custody in his capacity as court receiver in 1993-95.

While both these cases involved individual judges, the Ghaziabad case seems to point to some kind of organised, systematic corruption. Ordinarily, such an inquiry would have been buried, the files lost and the accused never named but Jain's tenacity and a proactive Ghaziabad district police prevented this. As the probe progressed, the investigators zeroed in on Ashutosh Asthana, the 'central nazir' (treasury in-charge) of the district court. On April 28, Asthana made a confessional statement revealing the gross financial misappropriation and the judges involved. His testimony was recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC before a magistrate, making it admissible in court as evidence.

Asthana's elaborate statement maps out exactly how money was illegally withdrawn from the employees general provident fund over a period of time to grease the palms of judges and other court officials. Asthana backed his testimony with vouchers, receipts and original bills to expose the murky nexus between lower court officials and judges.

After the facts were accumulated thus, the senior superintendent of police, Ghaziabad, wrote to the CJI seeking permission to investigate the role of the judges named by Asthana. However, the police was not allowed to conduct any standard investigation but asked to submit questionnaires that would be forwarded to the judges.

Transparency International, India, has challenged these directions to the Ghaziabad police and filed a writ petition through its counsel, Prashant Bhushan. Sources say that while a standard police investigation would involve conducting raids, seizures and interrogation, none of this has been agreed to by the Supreme Court. A similar petition filed by Nahar Singh Yadav, president of the Ghaziabad district court bar association, is seeking a CBI inquiry into the case. This is a demand supported by the district police and the ssp has written to the state director-general of police recommending that the case be handed over. The apex court has now given the UP government till October 22 to decide on whether it wants a CBI probe.

Meanwhile in the Punjab and Haryana HC, it's a disgraceful first for the higher judiciary. The CBI has got a go-ahead from the CJI to grill two lady judges for their alleged role in a bizarre cash scam, which became public only because of the sheer brazenness of the perpetrators.

On August 13 evening, a bag containing Rs 15 lakh in cash was delivered at the Chandigarh residence of Justice Nirmaljeet Kaur by the clerk of Sanjeev Bansal, additional advocate general (AAG), Haryana. In a case of mistaken identity, the cash landed at the wrong judge's house. Kaur informed the police immediately and the clerk was arrested and the money confiscated. A police interrogation of Bansal later revealed that it was meant for Justice Nirmal Yadav, another judge of the same court!

What surfaced during the next few days of investigations exposed the grimy underbelly of the judicial system. "It's a nexus between a lawyer, a judge and a businessman," special public prosecutor Anupam Gupta told a stunned courtroom in Chandigarh. The case was handed over to the CBI on August 26.

According to Bansal's statement, also recorded before a magistrate, the money was delivered on behalf of Delhi-based hotelier, Ravinder Singh Bhasin. Justice Yadav apparently needed the money to buy land in Solan district, Himachal Pradesh. Shockingly, when the first lot of Rs 15 lakh was confiscated by the police, Bhasin, through another accomplice, Rajeev Gupta, got another Rs 15 lakh delivered to the judge the very next day. Records show that she, her brother Ajay Singh Yadav, who is Haryana's irrigation minister, and several other family members did indeed buy 11.1 bighas (around two acres) of agricultural land in Solan on August 14.

The land was registered in the name of 18 people, four of whom are fictitious while some are the children of the judge and her brother. This was apparently done to get around the law which permits non-Himachalis to buy only 500 sq metres of land for residential purposes in the state. The HP government is also inquiring into alleged undervaluation of the land while it was registered.

Incidentally, Bhasin, who is currently absconding, is known to be an influential fixer having links with senior officers of the Delhi police, members of the higher judiciary and several politicians. And Bansal, his close associate, was apparently into investing the black money of prominent bureaucrats and legal bigwigs in properties. The police have recovered documents of properties worth crores owned by some of these people from his house.

It is clear that the investigations so far have discomfited powerful forces keen to keep the lid on more disclosures. As special PP Gupta admitted in court: "There is tremendous pressure from both within and outside the legal system on the investigating agency. It is up against a very powerful, intelligent and well-connected nexus that involves higher members of the judiciary."

The recent cases exposing the judiciary is a reflection of the lack of accountability. Both the lawyer community and retired judges have long been stressing the need to set up a national judicial council to serve as a watchdog. But the several proposals so far has hit one roadblock or the other. Hopefully, lawmakers will now see reason and act to ensure that no one is above the law, not even the judge.