'If it happens with politician...he becomes target': Jagdeep Dhankhar after issue of cash found at Delhi HC judge's house echoes in Rajya Sabha

New Delhi: Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar on Friday appeared to find fault with the response of Supreme Court collegium in dealing with the recovery of cash from a Delhi High Court judge’s residence, saying the incident did not immediately surface like it does in cases of a politician or a bureaucrat or an industrialist.

He referred to the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) that was struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2015 and said if the mechanism that was passed unanimously by Parliament was in place, the issue of judicial accountability would have been addressed and such issues would not have been acceptable.

As Congress Chief Whip Jairam Ramesh raised the issue at the start of Rajya Sabha proceedings, Dhankhar said he would find a mechanism for holding a structured discussion on the issue in the House after consulting Leader of the House J P Nadda and Leader of the Opposition Mallikarjun Kharge.

"What bothers me is that the incident happened and did not immediately surface. If it happens with a politician, a bureaucrat, an industrialist he becomes a target immediately and therefore, systemic response which is transparent, accountable, effective, I am sure will be on the way," he said, as Ramesh mentioned that Dhankhar himself has repeatedly spoken about the urgency for judicial accountability.

A large amount of cash was recovered by Delhi Fire Brigade from the residence of Justice Yashwant Varma after they doused a blaze there. After the incident was reported to Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, a collegium chaired by him transferred Verma to Allahabad High Court.

Raising the issue, Ramesh said they have read about a "shocking case" of huge amounts of cash being unearthed at the residence of a judge of the Delhi High Court. He also asked what decision has been taken on an impeachment notice they have submitted against another Allahabad High Court judge Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav over his controversial comments.

“That historic legislation endorsed by this Parliament with unprecedented consensual support unknown to parliamentary history of this country dealt with the malaise very severely. If the malaise had been dealt with perhaps we would not have countenanced such kind of issues," he said in reference to NJAC though he did not mention it by name.

“You all will recollect if the mechanism which was passed by this House with near unanimity, with no dissension, only one abstention in Rajya Sabha, all political parties converging, going in for the initiative of the government. I wish to find out the status of that which emanated from Indian Parliament made sacrosanct by endorsement of 16 state assemblies in the country and signed by the President under Article 111 of the Constitution,” he said.

On the impeachment notice signed by 55 MPs, he said verification of signatures is on and most of the signatories have responded positively while some members are yet to do so. He said as and when he receives confirmation of 50 signatures, which is required as per law in this case, he would move forward.

However, he said of the 55 MPs who signed the representation, an MP’s signature appears on two occasions and the concerned person has denied his signature. “Now, I do not wish to get into this act which may graduate to culpability to a higher level. If the number is above 50, I will proceed accordingly,” he said.

“Most of the members have cooperated. Those members who have not done so far, may please do it in response to the second mail sent to them. Then the process will not be delayed at my level even for a moment,” he said.

The MPs, including independent MP Kapil Sibal, Congress MPs Digvijaya Singh and Jairam Ramesh, RJD's Manoj K Jha , CPI(M)'s John Brittas, CPI's P Sandhosh Kumar and Trinamool Congress' Saket Gokhale, had initiated the impeachment process against Justice Yadav, accusing him of indulging in hate speech, making political speeches and claiming that the country will function according to majority’s wishes.