Punjab and Haryana High Court allows CBI to question six additional witnesses in the case involving Justice Nirmal Yadav for a fair trial.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has permitted the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to question six additional witnesses in a case involving Justice Nirmal Yadav, a former High Court Judge. Justice Nirmal Yadav is implicated in a 2008 incident where a bag with Rs. 15 lakhs was delivered to the home of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, who was a sitting Judge at that time. The CBI was appealing against a decision made by the Special Judge at the CBI Court in Chandigarh, which rejected its request to examine 22 prosecution witnesses under Section 322 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul, in a Single Bench, stated, “After careful consideration of the arguments and established legal principles, this Court concludes that these witnesses are essential for a fair resolution of the case, and the accused will not be prejudiced since the defense will have the chance to challenge the evidence presented by the summoned witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C.”
Special Public Prosecutor Akashdeep Singh represented the CBI, while Senior Advocate S.K. Garg and Advocates G.C. Shahpuri and Sangram S. Saron represented the other side. The case began with an FIR filed by the Chandigarh Police on August 16, 2008. According to the FIR, on August 13, 2008, around 8:30 pm, an event took place at Justice Nirmaljeet Kaur’s camp office in Chandigarh. Amrik Singh, the office peon, was visited by Prakash Munshi, who gave him a plastic bag, claiming it held documents from Delhi. Without inspecting it, Amrik Singh took the bag inside and informed Justice Nirmaljeet Kaur, who then told him to check it. When opened, the bag contained cash. Justice Nirmaljeet Kaur reprimanded Amrik Singh and instructed him to apprehend the person who delivered the bag.
Amrik Singh, along with Justice Nirmaljeet Kaur and Guard Guruvinder Singh, caught Prakash Munshi and called the police. The police arrived and took Munshi and the cash into custody. Later, the investigation was handed over to the CBI, which filed a chargesheet after completing its work. The Special Court then framed charges against the accused. According to the prosecution, the Rs. 15 lakhs delivered by a clerk of former Haryana Additional Advocate General Sanjeev Bansal was intended for Justice Nirmal Yadav, not Justice Nirmaljeet Kaur.
In this context, the High Court noted, “The CBI has filed a petition to recall and re-examine certain witnesses and summon additional ones to support its case. The accused/respondents opposed this on several grounds, including delay, alleged misuse of process, and claims that the prosecution is trying to fill gaps in its case at a late stage.” The Court acknowledged Section 311 Cr.P.C., which gives the Court the power to summon or recall witnesses at any point in the proceedings. It stated, “Even if allowing the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. may delay the trial, this cannot prevent the complainant from having a fair trial. The Court must balance both sides and consider the need for evidence under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to reach a fair decision in the case.”
The Court believed that every application should be looked at individually to see if the evidence being requested is necessary for a fair decision in the case. It stated that the request for examining the evidence cannot be denied just because it seems to fill gaps. As a result, the High Court partially approved the Petition and instructed the CBI to interview 6 witnesses within four weeks.
Cause Title: Central Bureau of Investigation v. Ravinder Singh @ Ravinder Singh Bhasin and others (Neutral Citation: 2025:PHHC:022976)
Appearance:
Petitioner: SPP Akashdeep Singh
Respondents: Senior Advocate S.K. Garg, Advocates G.C. Shahpuri, Sangram S. Saron, Madhavrao Rajwade, and Vishal Garg Narwana.
