The 17-year-long legal battle surrounding the infamous 2008 "cash-at-judge's-door" case finally came to an end on Saturday, with a special CBI court in Chandigarh acquitting former Punjab and Haryana High Court judge, Justice Nirmal Yadav, along with three other accused—Ravinder Singh Bhasin, Rajiv Gupta, and Nirmal Singh. The verdict was pronounced by Additional Sessions Judge Alka Malik, who ruled that the prosecution had failed to establish the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. The acquittal marks the conclusion of a high-profile case that had rocked the Indian judiciary and triggered intense debates over corruption within the legal system.
The case first came to light in August 2008, when a packet containing ₹15 lakh in cash was mistakenly delivered to the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur, another sitting judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court at the time. According to investigators, the cash was actually meant for Justice Nirmal Yadav, but due to an alleged mix-up, it ended up at the wrong address. When a courier arrived at Justice Kaur’s house on August 13, 2008, claiming to be delivering "documents" from Delhi, she grew suspicious and insisted that he open the packet. To her shock, the packet contained bundles of ₹1,000 currency notes amounting to ₹15 lakh. Justice Kaur immediately alerted the police, leading to an FIR being registered.
As the investigation progressed, it was revealed that the money had been arranged by Sanjeev Bansal, a former Additional Advocate General of Haryana, through his peon, Parkash Ram. The CBI probe later established that businessman Ravinder Singh had arranged for the sum to be sent from Delhi, and Rajiv Gupta was responsible for ensuring that the packet reached Justice Yadav’s residence. However, due to a miscommunication or a delivery mistake, the packet ended up at Justice Kaur’s doorstep instead. Once the scandal broke, the legal and political ramifications were swift, with calls for accountability growing louder.
The case was soon transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on the directions of then Union Territory (UT) Administrator SF Rodrigues. After conducting a detailed probe, the CBI filed a charge sheet against Justice Nirmal Yadav on March 4, 2011—the very day she retired from the Uttarakhand High Court, where she had been transferred in 2009. In addition to Justice Yadav, charges were also framed against four other individuals: Sanjeev Bansal (who allegedly arranged for the money to be sent), Ravinder Singh (who provided the cash), Rajiv Gupta (who was responsible for delivering the money), and Nirmal Singh (a private individual with alleged connections to the case).
The charge sheet accused Justice Yadav of offenses punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, while the other accused faced charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, during the prolonged trial, Sanjeev Bansal passed away, reducing the number of accused to four. Throughout the proceedings, Justice Yadav consistently denied any wrongdoing, claiming that she was being framed as part of an internal conspiracy within the judiciary. In 2013, she publicly stated that she was being unfairly targeted and that the allegations against her were fabricated by certain vested interests within the legal system.
Despite years of hearings, legal arguments, and extensive scrutiny by the media, the special CBI court ultimately ruled in favor of acquittal, citing a lack of direct and conclusive evidence proving that the cash was indeed intended as a bribe for Justice Yadav. The court held that the prosecution had failed to demonstrate any clear link between the money and a specific judicial favor, thereby making the charges unsustainable. The judgment effectively absolves all surviving accused of any criminal liability in the case.
Following the verdict, Advocate Vishal, representing Justice Yadav, stated, "A false narrative was set that money was sent as a bribe, but there was nothing like that. The court examined all aspects of the case and found no credible evidence against my client. Today, justice has prevailed, and everyone has been acquitted." The case, which had once cast a shadow over the credibility of the Indian judiciary, has now ended with all accused walking free, bringing closure to one of India’s longest-running judicial corruption trials.
Despite the acquittal, legal experts believe that the case has left an indelible mark on the public perception of the judiciary. Many argue that while the accused have been cleared of legal wrongdoing, the controversy highlighted the need for greater transparency and accountability within India’s legal system. The case also served as a reminder of the deep-seated challenges in investigating allegations of corruption involving high-ranking officials.
With the conclusion of the trial, Justice Nirmal Yadav, now retired, is expected to continue advocating for her reputation, asserting that she was the victim of a politically motivated attack. The other acquitted individuals are also likely to seek redress for the damage done to their reputations over the past 17 years. However, for the broader public and the legal community, the case will remain a cautionary tale about the complexities and ramifications of corruption allegations at the highest levels of the judiciary.
