The Supreme Court (SC) on [date] refused to grant an urgent hearing to a plea demanding the registration of an FIR following the discovery of large sums of cash at the residence of a High Court judge. The petition sought immediate intervention, citing the seriousness of the matter and its implications on judicial integrity.
SC’s Stand on Urgent Mentioning
A bench led by [Judge's Name, if available] declined the urgent listing of the petition, stating that the case would be taken up in due course. The court emphasized that while the allegations were serious, proper legal procedures must be followed.
The petitioners argued that the recovery of such a huge amount of unaccounted cash raises concerns of judicial corruption and warrants a thorough investigation. They demanded that law enforcement agencies, including the CBI or ED, be directed to register an FIR and conduct an independent probe.
Background of the Controversy
The case revolves around the recent discovery of large sums of cash at the residence of a sitting High Court judge, reportedly during a raid conducted by investigative agencies. The incident has triggered widespread debate over transparency and accountability within the judiciary.
Several legal experts and activists have called for a fair and impartial investigation to ensure that public confidence in the judiciary remains intact. However, some legal scholars have pointed out that the constitutional provisions regarding judicial independence must be carefully considered before any coercive action is taken against a sitting judge.
Petitioners’ Demand for FIR
The plea argues that the inaction of authorities despite the seizure of cash is concerning. The petitioners emphasized that a lack of accountability in such cases could erode public trust in the judiciary and set a dangerous precedent.
"When such allegations arise against members of the judiciary, it is imperative that an impartial probe is conducted to uphold the sanctity of the legal system," the petition stated.
What’s Next?
While the Supreme Court has refused to urgently list the case, the matter is expected to be taken up at a later date. Meanwhile, legal experts believe that this issue could spark discussions on judicial accountability and the need for stricter mechanisms to address corruption allegations within the judiciary.
For now, all eyes remain on whether investigative agencies will proceed with an FIR and independent investigation or whether the case will face further legal hurdles.
