In a new twist in the 'cash-at-judge's-door' case, a designated court here today ordered further investigations by the CBI, brushing aside the agency's closure report.

CBI Special Judge Darshan Singh pronounced the order for further investigations and posted the next hearing in the case for May 26.

As regards a petition of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association against the CBI's request for closure of the case, the Court dismissed it on the grounds of locus standi and maintainability. The Association has decided to challenge this decision.

The case came to light in August, 2008 when an amount of Rs 15 lakh was "wrongly delivered" at the residence of Justice Nirmaljit Kaur of the Punjab and Haryana High Court here following which she reported the matter to the police.

The money was actually meant for another judge, it was contended.

Sanjeev Bansal, the prime accused in the case and Anupam Gupta, the counsel on behalf of the petitioner Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association, had concluded their arguments at the last hearing.

Gupta, the counsel for the Association, which had moved a protest petition against the closure report filed by the CBI in the case, had earlier maintained that offences were made out against the accused and quoted several earlier Supreme Court judgments to stress his point that the "opinion of Attorney General in the case was not binding".

"The then AG's opinion that no case is made out against the accused is not binding. The CBI says the case is made out. Under the CBI manual the opinion of the CBI Director is final and the AG finds no place in the scheme of things as per the investigating agency's own manual," Gupta had said on March 20 in response to Bansal's assertion that the opinion of the AG was binding.

He had also told the Court earlier that if the present AG says the no case is made out, then the Bar will "withdraw" its petition.

Gupta, who was present in the Court today, had on behalf of the Association filed a 16-page report before the CBI Court on March 19 as evidence in support of their petition protesting the closure report filed by the investigating agency.

Gupta had said a detailed report, supported by statements of various witnesses in the case, had been filed before the CBI court, which include the statement of Sanjeev Bansal's wife Renu Bansal and R K Jain, a judicial officer of Haryana.