8 of 16 CJIs were corrupt: Ex-Law Minister
Zeenews
       English        
Tuesday, May 29, 2012 
Search
Follwo us on: Facebook Follwo us on: Twiter RSS Mail to us Mail to us Mail to us
Nation

8 of 16 CJIs were corrupt: Ex-Law Minister

Last Updated: Friday, September 17, 2010, 09:08
Comments 11  
8 of 16 CJIs were corrupt: Ex-Law Minister Zeenews Bureau

New Delhi: Former Union Law Minister Shanti Bhushan Thursday told the Supreme Court that at least eight of the 16 chief justices of India (CJIs) were "definitely corrupt".

In an affidavit filed Thursday, senior counsel Shanti Bhushan said that six of the CJIs were "definitely honest" and he could not comment on the remaining two judges.

The senior counsel sought to be impleaded in a case in which his son Prashant Bhushan is facing contempt proceedings.

Sixteen CJIs that Shanti Bhushan has mentioned in his affidavit are: Justice Rangnath Mishra, Justice K.N. Singh, Justice M.H. Kaina, Justice L.M. Sharma, Justice M.N. Venkatachalliah, Justice A.M. Ahemadi, Justice J.S. Verma, Justice M.M. Punchhi, Justice A.S. Anand, Justice S.P. Bharucha, Justice B.N. Kirpal, Justice G.B. Pathak, Justice Rajendra Babu, Justice R.C. Lohati, Justice V.N. Khare and Justice Y.K. Sabharwal.

As per reports, the Bhushan has submitted the names of the eight corrupt judges in a sealed envelope to the apex court. Shanti Bhushan in his affidavit said that two former CJIs had personally told him that their immediate predecessors and immediate successors were corrupt judges. He said that the names of those four CJIs were included in the list of eight corrupt CJIs.

The plea, if accepted by the apex court is likely to open a can of worms and renew calls for a total clean up in the Indian judiciary.

The 82-year-old lawyer and his advocate son Prashant Bhushan are well known for their aggressive campaign against corruption in judiciary.

Prashant Bhushan is facing a contempt of court proceeding for writing an article on corruption in Indian judiciary and allegedly casting aspersions on CJI SH Kapadia and his predecessor Justice KG Balakrishnan.

Earlier on July 14, the Supreme Court upheld the maintainability of the suo motu contempt action initiated against advocate Prashant Bhushan for casting aspersions on CJI Kapadia and his predecessor Justice KG Balakrishnan.

A three-judge Bench of Justices Altamas Kabir, Cyriac Joseph and H L Dattu asked Bhushan to file his affidavit within 12 weeks and posted the matter for final hearing to November 10.

"We have upheld the maintainability of the notice and have decided to hear the matter on merits," the Bench said.

Bhushan had earlier questioned the maintainability of the notice issued by the apex court on the contempt application moved by senior advocate Harish Salve for the alleged contemptuous remarks in a news magazine. Salve had moved the application while acting as the amicus curaie in the Forest Bench.

The alleged contemnor advocate had in an interview to 'Tehelka' magazine made the remarks against Justice Kapadia in 2009 as well as some other judges and previous CJIs.



He had alleged Justice Kapadia, being a member of the Forest Bench along with then Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan, should not have heard the matter relating to Vedanta Sterlite Group as he held shares of the company.

Justice Kapadia later recused himself from hearing a matter pertaining to the public offer made by London-based Vedanta Resources to buy additional stake in iron ore exporting firm Sesa Goa as he happens to be shareholder of a sister company.

The court had also issued a notice to Editor-in-Chief of Tehelka Tarun Tejpal which had carried Bhushan's interview.

Senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, appearing for Bhushan, had earlier argued before the Bench that it should not proceed with the contempt proceedings as there is a serious risk that it will gain an impression that it is being issued for suppressing the uncomfortable facts about the judiciary.

"If the matter is heard, the outcome can bring much more tragedy," he had said adding Salve's application was not maintainable and should be dismissed.

The senior advocate had submitted that the power of the court to take suo motu contempt action has to be used sparingly in the rarest of rare case.

First Published: Friday, September 17, 2010, 09:08

Comments

Indian - Mumbai
Former Law Minister Shanti Bhushan has eight immovable assets in Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Bangalore and his total movable asset is more than Rs 121 crore.IBN Live


121 Crores....????

God Help India
Reply



Post your Comments

X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 
Suneel Sardana - New Delhi-INDIA
why are you not posting the comments of readers?
there are no comments after page 1 whereas many readers have posted their comments & agreed to mr.shanti bhushan allegations including me.
Reply



Post your Comments

X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 
AKS - MAT
just give immunity from contempt laws for one day and hear what this country believes about its higher and lower judiciary .
Reply



Post your Comments

X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 
SP SETHI - PUNE
let us accept that justice in india is protected only by the judiciary. the high courts and the supreme court of this cluntry is the common mans last hope.

let us spare the judiciary they are doing a great jod for the common man.


Reply



Post your Comments

X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 
natarajan - Bangalore
it`s not 50% it`s 99% of the judges are corrupt, advocates and judges have good understandings. recently we have seen in media mass copying in judge`s examination in ap is just small example & one can guess what type of people are becoming judges.

as my friend rightly says,mr.bushan should have done something when he was in power. why he was silent? because he too was a part of the corrupt system.
Reply



Post your Comments

X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 
Pravesh Kumar - Noida
the suprem court is the apex judicial body in the country and the people of this nation, of late, have greater expectations from judiciary then the other three pillars of the constitution. hence the sanctity of this insitution must be maintained. a thorough probe in the matter should be done and must be brought in to public domain
Reply



Post your Comments

X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 
Mithu Hiranand Sadarangani - Las Palmas, Spain
the 8 cjis must have bribed to be called honesthahaha. how can there be only 8 cjis corrupt? unbelievable.
Reply



Post your Comments

X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 
Afzal ahmad - Faizabad
if mr. bhusan is right then he should stick on this word and go ahead with the same swing and if heis wrong and he knows then he should leave and take back the step and do not waste the vital time of court.
Reply



Post your Comments

X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 
Dr. D. K. Jha - Jamshedpur
any where in india, ``court campus`` is considered as the epitome of corruption. this is an ``open secrecy`` for the commoners of india.
Reply



Post your Comments

X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 
BRIJ - NEWYORK
this big mouth minister talking today when he is not in power,what he was doing during his regime collecting share,let me say some thing without these people shares no body can indulge in corruption regardless.
Reply



Post your Comments

X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 

View all Comments   

Post your Comments

Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :
 

Most liked Comments