New Delhi, May 19 (PTI) Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Monday asserted "time has come to revisit" the Supreme Court judgment that ruled prior sanction would be required to prosecute top court and high court judges, as he questioned the delay in lodging of an FIR in the cash discovery case involving high court judge Justice Yashwant Varma.
He also described as a "serious issue" the move of the three-judge in-house committee probing into the case to recover electronic equipment from witnesses. "This is a serious issue. How can this be done?"
Laying stress on the need for a scientific criminal investigation into the matter, Dhankhar said everyone in the country was thinking if this would be washed off, whether it would fade with time.
"How come the criminal justice system was not operationalised as it would have done for every other individual? ... This issue for which people are waiting with bated breath, the money trail, its source, its purpose, did it pollute the judicial system? Who are the bigger sharks? We need to find out. Already two months have gone by and no one knows better than people before me. Investigation is required to be with expedition," he said.
Justice Varma was transferred to Allahabad High Court in March following the alleged discovery of a huge amount of cash from his official home in New Delhi where he was serving as a judge of Delhi High Court.
Speaking at a book launch event, Dhankhar said "time has come to revisit" the K Veeraswami judgment.
The K Veeraswami vs Union of India case of 1991 is a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court that addresses the applicability of anti-corruption laws to judges of the higher judiciary and underscores the importance of judicial independence.
The top court had underlined that judges were indeed "public servants" under the Prevention of Corruption Act but noted that prior sanction would be required to prosecute a judge.
There is a need to provide judges with something like impregnability when it comes to challenge to judges on sinister premise by pernicious design by forces that cannot digest the independence of judiciary, the vice-president said.
"But that requires an in-house regulatory mechanism which is transparent, accountable, expeditious and which should not have peer concern. We all are victims of it. For example, in Parliament, a breach of privilege is determined by the same people who sit alongside but we have to be ruthless," he added.
The committee can be legitimately constituted either by the speaker or the chairman, as the case may be, when the requisite number of Mps come with a resolution to remove the judge, he said, questioning the legitimacy of the in-house committee that probed into the case.
"Now, just imagine how much labour has gone to the chief justices of two high courts ... They (are) involved with an inquiry which does not have any constitutional premise or legal sanctity but most importantly it will be inconsequential. The inquiry report may be sent to anyone under a mechanism evolved by the court on the administrative side," he said.
Emphasising the significance of rule of law in a democracy, the vice-president said there was no FIR till date.
"We have in the country rule of law, criminal justice system. And if I go to the legal field which is occupied by legislation, there can be no occasion whatsoever to delay even for a moment because that is ordainment of law. The rule of law is the very foundation of society," Dhankhar asserted.