This is News Network
Chandigarh: In a significant judgment delivered by a Special CBI Court in Chandigarh in the second fortnight of March 2025, Justice Nirmal Yadav, a former judge of the Punjab & Haryana High Court, has been acquitted in a long-standing corruption case dating back to 2008.
The detailed 89-page verdict not only clears Justice Yadav of all charges but also delivers a sharp rebuke to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for presenting what the Court described as unreliable and fabricated evidence.
The case revolved around allegations that Justice Yadav received ₹15 lakh in cash as an illicit benefit while serving on the High Court bench. The money was allegedly delivered mistakenly to the courtroom of another judge, Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, prompting a complaint and subsequent investigation.
Initially, the CBI filed a closure report, suggesting insufficient grounds to pursue the case. However, this report was not accepted by the then presiding CBI Judge, who directed further investigation. Eventually, the agency charged Justice Yadav and four others under multiple provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code.
Throughout the trial, the prosecution presented 78 witnesses, among them RK Jain, a litigant and former Additional District Judge in Haryana, whose property-related case had previously been ruled against by Justice Yadav. Jain alleged that the unfavorable judgment was the result of a bribe, but the Court questioned his credibility. Special Judge Alka Malik stated that Jain’s testimony was riddled with “assumptions, presumptions, hypotheses, and falsehood,” and noted that he had failed to raise these allegations during his initial statement to investigators in 2008, only doing so in a supplementary statement two years later.
Calling into question the integrity of the investigation, the Court remarked: “It would have been far more commendable had a premier investigating agency like the CBI stood by its original closure report, rather than constructing a case around a witness proven to be unreliable.”
Judge Malik also dismissed the central premise of the prosecution—that a sitting High Court judge would accept a bribe five months after a judgment had already been delivered—as “highly implausible.” The judgment further emphasized that the chain of evidence required to substantiate the prosecution’s theory was “missing,” and no concrete link could be established between the alleged bribe and Justice Yadav.
Out of the 78 witnesses, 18 turned hostile, further weakening the prosecution’s claims. The Court criticized the CBI’s reliance on extra-judicial confessions and unverified hearsay, noting that such evidence lacked legal and evidentiary substance.
Moreover, the call detail records cited by the agency were also deemed insufficient. Testimonies from telecom nodal officers clarified that the listed subscriber and actual user of a phone could be different individuals, and the CDRs failed to establish any meaningful location-based connection between the accused parties.
In the absence of any legal proof that Justice Yadav received the alleged sum, the Court ruled in favor of her acquittal, along with the remaining co-accused. One of the five initially charged had passed away during the proceedings.
The verdict not only brings an end to a case that spanned over 15 years but also raises serious concerns about investigative practices and the evidentiary standards maintained by central agencies in high-profile matters.
S.K. Garg Narwana and V.G. Narwana, Advocates, were counsel for the accused Justice Nirmal Yadav.
This is News 