The North News
Chandigarh, March 29
A special CBI court in Chandigarh on Saturday acquitted retired Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Nirmal Yadav and three others in the high-profile 2008 cash-at-judge’s-door case, ending a 17-year-long legal battle. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleged that Delhi-based hotelier Ravinder Singh had purchased land in Himachal Pradesh in partnership with Yadav. According to the agency, Singh sent Rs 15 lakh as payment through his friend Sanjeev Bansal, but due to a miscommunication, the cash was wrongly delivered to the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, triggering the case.
According to The CBI, a peon, Amrik Singh, at Justice Kaur’s residence, told the police that Parkash Ram arrived at the house with a plastic bag, saying, “papers had come from Delhi for Justice Kaur.” Upon instructions from Justice Kaur, Amrik Singh opened the bag and discovered it contained currency notes. The police were called, and they took Parkash Ram and the cash into custody, the CBI said.
The case also named Chandigarh businessman Rajiv Gupta and Nirmal Singh. Sanjeev Bansal, a former Additional Advocate General of Haryana, was also implicated but passed away during the trial.
Following the verdict, Yadav’s advocate, Vishal Garg Narwana, told the media that the case was based on false statements and a misleading campaign. “The CBI court has acquitted retired judge Yadav and three others. The case was built on fake news and a fabricated narrative about the cash recovery. Initially, it was registered by Chandigarh Police, but it was later transferred to the CBI on the directions of the Punjab Governor,” he said.
The CBI sought permission from the high court to re-examine 22 witnesses, arguing their testimonies were critical to the case. However, the court allowed only six to be re-examined. Of the 84 witnesses initially cited, 69 were eventually examined.
The prosecution argued that the CBI had presented a watertight case. However, Narwana dismissed the claim, stating that the agency had previously filed a closure report, which suggested there was no conclusive evidence against Yadav.
