Be you ever so high, the law is above you

In a case against Justice Nirmal Yadav, she was charge sheeted by CBI for accepting Rs. 10 Lakh bribe for passing an unlawful order. It isruled as under; “Hon’ble Supreme Court observed: Be you ever so high, the law is above you.” Merely because the petitioner has enjoyed one of the highest constitutional offices( Judge of a High Court ), she cannot claim any specialright or privilege as an accused than prescribed under law. Rule of law has to prevail and must prevail equally and uniformly, irrespective of the status of an individual. The petitioner Justice Mrs. Nirmal Yadav, the then Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court found to have taken bribe todecide a case pending before herCBI charge sheeted - It is also part of investigation by CBI that this amount of Rs.15.00lacs was received by Ms. Yadav as a consideration for deciding RSA 65 No.550 of 2007 pertaining to plot no.601,Sector 16, Panchkula for which Sanjiv Bansal had acquired interest. It is stated that during investigation, it is also revealed that Sanjiv Bansal paid the fare of air tickets of Mrs.Yadav and Mrs. Yadav used matrix mobile phone card provided to her by Shri Ravinder Singh on her foreign visit. To establish the close proximity between Mrs. Yadav, Ravinder Singh, Sanjiv Bansal and Rajiv Gupta, CBI has given details of phone calls amongst these accused persons during the period when money changed hands and the incidence of delivery of money at the residence of Ms. Nirmaljit Kaur and even during the period of initial investigation - the CBI concluded that the offence punishableunder Section 12 of the PC Act is established against Ravinder Singh, Sanjiv Bansal and Rajiv Gupta whereasoffence under Section 11 of the PC Act is established againstMrs.Justice Nirmal Yadav whereas offence punishableunder Section 120-B of the IPC read with Sections 193, 192, 196, 199 and 200 IPC is also established against Shri Sanjiv Bansal, Rajiv Gupta and Mrs. Justice Nirmal yadav It has been observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court "Be you everso high, the law is above you.” Merely because the petitionerhas enjoyed one of the highest constitutional offices( Judge ofa High Court ), she cannot claim any special right or privilege as an accused than prescribed under law. Rule of law has to prevail and must prevail equally and uniformly, 66 irrespective of the status of an individual. Taking a panoptic view of all the factual and legal issues, I find no valid ground forjudicialintervention in exercise of inherent jurisdiction vested with this Court. Consequently, this petition is dismissed. B) In-House procedure 1999 , for enquiry against High Court and Supreme Court Judges - Since the matter pertains to allegations against a sitting High Court Judge, the then Hon'ble Chief Justice of India, constituted a three members committee comprising of Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.L.Gokhale, the then Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court, presently Judge of Hon'ble Supreme Court, Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan, the then Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court, presently, Judge of Hon'ble Supreme Court and Justice Madan B.Lokur, the then Judge of Delhi HighCourt, presently Chief Justice Gauhati High Court in termsof In-House procedure adopted by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 7.5.1997. The order dated 25.8.2008 constituting the Committee also contains the terms of reference of the Committee. The Committee was asked to enquire into the allegations against Justice Mrs. Nirmal Yadav, Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court revealed, during the course of investigation in the case registered vide FIR No.250 of 2008 dated 16.8.2008 at Police Station, Sector 11,Chandigarh and later transferred to CBI. The Committee during the course of its enquiry examined the witnesses and recorded the statements of as many as 19 witnesses, 67 including Mrs.Justice Nirmal Yadav (petitioner), Ms.Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, Sanjiv Bansal, the other accused named in the FIR and various other witnesses. The Committee also examined various documents, including data of phone calls exchanged between Mrs. Justice Nirmalyadav and Mr.Ravinder Singh and his wife Mohinder Kaur, Mr.Sanjiv Bansal and Mr.Ravinder Singh, Mr.Rajiv Guptaand Mr. Sanjiv Bansal. On the basis of evidence and material before it, the Committee of Hon'ble Judges has drawn an inference that the money delivered at the residence of Hon'ble Ms.Justice Nirmaljit Kaur was in fact meant forMs. Justice Nirmal Yadav.”