|
The Supreme Court has rightly asked the CBI to investigate the multi-crore Ghaziabad Provident Fund scam allegedly involving 34 judges, including one Supreme Court and as many as 11 high court judges. The fact that the Bench headed by Justice Arijit Pasayat has directed the CBI to file a status report before it within three months suggests the apex court’s determination to get to the bottom of the case and ferret out the truth before taking further action. Indeed, following the PF scandal, the image of the judiciary has hit a new low because this is for the first time that a large number of judges have come under public suspicion. Shockingly, between 2003 and 2007, over Rs 23 crore was siphoned off by the 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 such as television sets, air-conditioners, sofa sets and provide other services to judges and court officials across the country. If it turns out to be true, it will be a shame.
Significantly, in the past few weeks, Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan has been playing a pro-active role to stem the rot in the higher judiciary. Very recently, he had written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh recommending the impeachment of Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court. As court receiver, Justice Sen had reportedly collected Rs 24.57 lakh between 1993 and 1995 and had transferred the entire money to his personal account. On the cash-at-door scam in Chandigarh, too, Justice Balakrishnan gave the green signal to the CBI to question a couple of judges to find out who was the High Court judge for whom Additional Advocate General of Haryana sent a packet of Rs 15 lakh. One of the judges, Ms Nirmal Yadav, was asked to go on leave soon after the scandal burst out causing shock waves.
For the CBI, the PF scam and the cash-at-the-door scandal are major assignments requiring thorough investigation into the two serious cases involving judicial corruption. The confessional statement of Ashutosh Asthana, who was in charge of the Ghaziabad district court treasury, under Section 164 Cr PC will be important in the probe because he has supplied all the vouchers, receipts and original bills to expose the unholy nexus between the lower court staff and the judges under cloud. Hopefully, the CBI will do its job fairly without succumbing to pressure from any quarter because it is on the basis of its report that the Supreme Court will decide the nature of further actions which in turn might set precedents.
|
