Chandigarh: A defence lawyer in 2008 cash-at-judge’s door scam, involving former Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Nirmal Yadav, today questioned authenticity of entries made in Daily Dairy Reports (DDR) while examining two prosecution witnesses in a CBI court here.
During the trial proceedings, two witnesses– Police Head Constables Bahadur Singh and Satyabir Singh– were examined, of the six witnesses, who were present in the court.
“The witnesses were examined to authenticate entries made in Daily Dairy Reports (DDR) pertaining to delivery of Rs 15 lakh cash on the complaint of peon of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur in August 2008, which was actually meant for Justice Nirmal Yadav,” Anupam Gupta, CBI prosecutor, told reporters here today.
The other accused in the case are– Sanjiv Bansal, former Additional Advocate General, Haryana, Delhi-based hotelier Ravinder Singh, city-based businessman Rajiv Gupta and one Nirmal Singh.
Advocate B S Riar, defence lawyer representing Sanjeev Bansal, while challenging the DDR entries said that these were “fabricated” by the Chandigarh police.
“What is the authenticity of the DDR which were not even signed and which were not even in original form,” Riar said.
However, prosecution lawyer Anupam Gupta while dismissing the charge of defense lawyer said, “All the DDR entries are correct and witnesses stood by their testimonies.”
Meanwhile, Special CBI Court Judge Vimal Kumar adjourned the matter to April 12.
Yadav was not present in the court as she was granted permanent exemption from appearance by the court in the last hearing.
Gupta said now remaining witnesses including constable Gurminder Singh, who was posted at the residence of Judge Nirmaljit Kaur, Sub-Inspector Joginder Singh and SHO Ramesh Chander Sharma would be examined while complainant Amrik Singh would be cross-examined on the next date.
The Special CBI court had framed charges against Yadav on January 18 under Section 11 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and under various sections of IPC.
It had also framed charges against other accused, including hotelier Bhasin, Bansal and Gupta under Section 120B of IPC read with Section 12 of Prevention of Corruption Act.
Another accused, Nirmal Singh, along with Sanjeev Bansal and Rajiv Gupta, was charged under Section 120B of IPC read with various sections of IPC including 193 (punishment for false evidence) and 192 (making false entry in any record).
The cash-at-judge’s door scam had hit the headlines after a packet containing Rs 15 lakh was allegedly wrongly delivered at the residence of Nirmaljit Kaur, who was also a High Court judge, on August 13, 2008.
The matter was reported to Chandigarh Police, but the case was later handed over to CBI.
The investigative agency had charge-sheeted Yadav, who was then a judge of Uttarakhand High Court, in the case on March 4, 2011, the day of her retirement. She had been transferred from Punjab and Haryana High Court in November, 2009.
CBI held that Yadav had committed an offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Supreme Court had on January 3 this year dismissed Yadav’s plea for a stay on the proceedings of the trial court and pulled her up for adopting delaying tactics.
She had moved the high court against the orders of the Special CBI judge, Chandigarh, who had given the go-ahead for her prosecution in the alleged corruption case.
The trial court had ordered framing of charges against Yadav on 31 July, 2013.