LAW cannot be altered merely because she is a retired high court judge,the CBI on Tuesday told the Punjab and Haryana High Court while opposing the demand of Justice Nirmal Yadav accused in the infamous judge bribery case for photocopies of Union Ministry of Law and Justice records pertaining to the sanction of her prosecution.
While demanding photocopies of the records,Yadavs counsel argued that she was no ordinary client and was suffering from backache. Hence,rather than inspecting the entire record,she be allowed to have photocopies of the entire record, the counsel added.
Opposing this,senior CBI standing counsel,Anupam Gupta,said though Yadav was entitled to all respect but law cannot be altered or scheme of Criminal Procedure Code changed merely because she was a former high court judge.
Gupta added that there cannot be more comprehensive application of mind at the level of President of India,Chief Justice of India and Prime Minister at the time of deciding grant of sanction to prosecute Yadav in the case.
Responding to the argument that Yadav was well educated and would like to peruse the entire record herself to prepare her case,Gupta said: I will only be too happy if she (Nirmal Yadav) argues the case herself… All facilities can be given to her for inspection of the record but photocopies of the record cannot be supplied to her.
Documents demanded by Yadav have not even been collected by the prosecution during investigation and it belonged belong to the Union government,Gupta told the court. More importantly,even the CBI does not rely upon the documents she was seeking,he said,adding that the documents are totally consistent with the case of the prosecution in the current case.
The court will announce its verdict on the petition on May 13.
In February,a special CBI Court had dismissed Yadavs application seeking photocopies of the record summoned by the trial court from the Supreme Court registrar general and Union Ministry of Law and Justice regarding her prosecution sanction. The special CBI court had held that all accused and their counsel are at liberty to inspect the record and prepare notes either in hand or through stenographer.
Yadavs counsel for had contended that she would be able to assist the trial court in a better way if she has a copy of the record and the CBI courts order denying her the photocopies of the order was unjust and unfair.