Instead of helping shopkeepers, he made his sons rich; Aug1218,2007
According to your findings on Justice Sabharwal, a former Chief Justice of India is being implicated on charges of corruption.
The documents are there and they bear out the sequence of events. It is not a matter of inference. The documents speak for themselves and these are all government documents. The sealing drive led to the displacement of a huge number of shopkeepers. It is shocking because the documents make it clear that his sons had already tied up with big mall owners when Sabharwal’s order came. In fact big mall owners had been inducted into his son’s companies. They had also started another company for constructing malls etc., so what does it mean? It means that they were going to be beneficiaries of this drive. Because, immediately, the demand for space in a mall or shopping complex or a commercial complex was going to increase manifold. Residential areas have been used for commercial purposes for decades and the reason behind this is that the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has not created sufficient commercial areas as it was supposed to do. Soon after his sons entered the mall business and constituted a new company, he started this sealing drive. So, what is the inference? Sabharwal should not have heard this matter at all because his sons were going to benefit. It clearly shows it was all planned.
You are saying it was all part of a design?
What does this say of the integrity of the Chief Justice of India?
How inappropriate was his conduct?
Sabharwal referred to the sealing drive as his most difficult case because on one hand was the law, and on the other the suffering of the people.
Sabharwal also said he had to live with the wrath of his friends and relatives.
His sons were running their businesses from his house even as he ordered the demolition of other businesses being run from residences.
Prima facie, can a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act be registered against Sabharwal?
Then why is it a borderline case?
If a common man has a genuine grievance against a sitting judge, what recourse does he or she have?
So it will remain a source of embarrassment, but there will be no case?
Why did the media black out your findings?
The judiciary is opposing the setting up of the National Judicial Commission. How will taint in the judiciary ever be addressed?
Aug 18, 2007