PF.Etc

• Justice Nirmal Yadav: Cash at judge’s door: Supreme Court turns down Yadav’s plea: Justice HL Dattu and Justice CK Prasad
• Allahabad High Court filled with Uncle Judges: Supreme Court .   REPORTABLE
  J. MARKANDEY KATJU and J.GYAN SUDHA MISRA;   DECEMBER 10, 2010
• Common Cause vs Union Of India & Ors. on 10 May, 2012 [Read Here ].
  Former CJI K.G. Balakrishnan put on Trial in Supreme Court.
• Justice N. Kumar Vs Justice Nag Mohan Das
• Bansal asks court to replace prosecutor, alleges personal bias …Apr 8, 2012 ... Referring to several judgments including Apex Court judgment, Bansal … of Justice (retd) Nirmal Yadav of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. http://www.indianexpress.com
• …..S.C. Judgment UNCLE JUDGES of Allahabad High Court
• Justice N. Kumar Vs Justice Nag Mohan Das
• Bansal asks court to replace prosecutor, alleges personal bias …Apr 8, 2012 ... Referring to several judgments including Apex Court judgment, Bansal … of Justice (retd) Nirmal Yadav of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. http://www.indianexpress.com
• Judge-bribery case adjourned; to await outcome of Yadav’s apex …
• •  Jul 14, 2012 … Two days ago Punjab and Haryana High Court judge Justice Nirmal Yadav … Punjab judge Justice Nirmal Yadav, now a judge of the Uttrakhand High …. Plead for Acquittal, Release or Retrial, Lower court judgement is full of …article.wn.com
  • Post Retirement Activities of Supreme Court Judges :W.P (Civil) No. 866/2010
  • Petition to ensure Speedy Dispensation of Justice
  • Corrupt Judges in News
  • Probe former CJI KG Balakrishnan: Supreme Court
  • http://www.commoncause.in/judicial-reforms-initiatives.php
    1. Petition to ensure Speedy Dispensation of Justice
    2. Petition on Post Retirement Activities of Supreme Court Judges
    3. • 22 Jan 2011:Hearsay Evidence: The concept understood
       • In Ranjan Dwivedi vs C.B.I Tr.Director General on 17 August, 2012 [ Here ]

       13. The Constitution Bench, in Abdul Rehman Antulay v. R.S. Nayak, (supra),has formulated certain propositions, 11 in number, meant to serve as guidelines. They are :
       “86. In view of the above discussion, the following propositions emerge, meant to serve as guidelines. We must forewarn that these propositions are not exhaustive. It is difficult to foresee all situations. Nor is it possible to lay down any hard and fast rules. These propositions are:

       (1) Fair, just and reasonable procedure implicit in Article 21 of the Constitution creates a right in the accused to be tried speedily. Right to speedy trial is the right of the accused. The fact that a speedy trial is also in public interest or that it serves the social interest also, does not make it any the less the right of the accused. It is in the interest of all concerned that the guilt or innocence of the accused is determined as quickly as possible in the circumstances.

       (2) Right to speedy trial flowing from Article 21 encompasses all the stages, namely the stage of investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal, revision and re-trial. That is how, this Court has understood this right and there is no reason to take a restricted view.