Judges are not `caged parrots`, says court
Judges are not "caged parrots" and courts do not work as "post office", special court rejected allegation that Pawan Kumar Bansal was spared "purposely" by CBI in railway bribery case.
New Delhi: Judges are not "caged parrots" and courts do not work as the "post office" of prosecuting agency, a special court on Monday observed while rejecting the allegation that ex-Railway Minister Pawan Kumar Bansal had been spared "purposely" by CBI in the Rs 10 crore cash-for- post railway bribery case.
"While dealing with cases of corruption, it will be appropriate and wise to pass orders which send a strong message to the society that judges do not work as caged parrots and the judiciary in this country works freely without fear or pressure," Special CBI Judge Swarana Kanta Sharma said.
The court observed this while dismissing the plea of NGO, Delhi Pradesh Social Progress Society (DPSPS), holding that the petition was "devoid of merit" and that in the present case charges have already been framed against the accused persons.
"The other apprehension of the applicant that since Pawan Kumar Bansal has been cited as a witness by CBI, it is with malafide intention is also deviod of merit since I have already observed that courts do not work as post office of CBI or any prosecuting agency," the judge said.
The court`s order came on an NGO`s plea which had sought further direction to CBI to investigate the role of Bansal alleging that the agency had not probed his role "purposely".
The plea which was pending for disposal since November 30 last year, had alleged the telephone line of the then minister was used by the arrested accused, including Bansal`s nephew Vijay Singla, and CBI should have probed it further.
CBI, which had filed the charge sheet in July last year, has made 10 persons as accused and alleged Singla had demanded Rs 10 crore from then Member (Staff) of Railway Board Mahesh Kumar, an accused in the case, for his appointment as Member (Electrical).
The court, while dismissing the plea of the NGO, observed that it had already ordered framing of charges against the 10 accused who were chargesheeted by the CBI.
"In the present case chargesheet has been filed, based on the investigation of an FIR which was registered on the source information. The accused persons against whom incriminating evidence could be collected were arrested and chargesheeted.
"The facts as to why Pawan Kumar Bansal was not made an accused have been mentioned in the reply filed by CBI to the application of the applicant (DPSPS)," it said, adding, "It is clearly mentioned that CBI could not find any incriminating evidence against him (Bansal) and therefore he was not chargesheeted."
The court also said that the applicant, Rajkumar Asthana, the general secretary of an NGO, had not placed before it any further fact or evidence which necessitates further probe.
"Further investigation can be ordered either against a new fact or a fresh piece of evidence, neither of which are part of the application of Rajkumar. I have already stated that the applicant has not been able to satisfy the court regarding his locus standi to file the present application and therefore, the same being devoid of merit stands rejected," the judge added.