Heated arguments were witnessed today during the resumed hearing of the infamous judge bribery case in the special court of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Chandigarh.
While the co-accused in the case,Sanjeev Bansal,contended that Anupam Gupta – special CBI public prosecutor – has shown exceptional interest in the case since its inception,Gupta countered that he never approached any of the CBI officials for his appointment as the prosecutor.
Arguing in support of his application,Sanjeev Bansal seeking removal of Gupta as the special prosecutor said,Right from serving as the senior standing counsel for UT Administration to representing the Panjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association in the closure report,Gupta has shown his prejudice against the accused.
Responding to Bansals accusations,Gupta quipped,The applicant (Bansal) wants appointment of a prosecutor who is more fair to the accused than the prosecution. The prosecution should focus on the angle of vindication of justice and not the angle of favour to the accused. The interests of the accused is one of the points of consideration,not the only point of consideration.
Bansal further contended,The CBI has filed an inadequate reply to the fact that the investigating wing of CBI has ensured the appointment of Gupta as the prosecutor in order subvert the prosecuting wing,which has been in favour of closure of the case.
To this,Gupta replied,There has been no objection to my appointment at any level in the CBI. My appointment has been approved at the directors level. How do the accused have access to innermost files of the CBI. Let any inquiry be conducted in the issue. If it is established that,at any stage,I have made any efforts to be appointed as the special prosecutor,then my appointment be quashed.
Further,Bansal also pointed out that CBI Inspector,Vipin Kumar,has not attached any affidavit in support of the reply filed by him. The basis of verification of the facts and the statements has not been defined,he stated.
Gupta,on the other hand averred that the applicant (Bansal) has himself not attached any appropriate affidavit with his application.
The last page of the application states that facts of the petition have been verified by the applicant. It is pertinent to note that the applicant has simply moved an application and not filed a petition, Gupta said. Justice (retd) Nirmal Yadav,who stands chargesheeted in the case,was also present in the Court of Special CBI Judge Vimal Kumar. The case has been adjourned to March 24,since Bansal sought more time for further arguments.