New Delhi, Mar 13 (UNI) The Supreme Court today declined to hear an application filed by Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav and his family members seeking stay of a CBI investigation against them in the disproportionate assets case till the state Assembly elections are over.
A Bench, comprising Justices A R Lakshmanan and Altamas Kabir, said the application for directions was nothing but a review petition filed in guise of an application, which was not permissible under the rules of the apex court.
The Chief Minister's counsel Altaf Ahmed contended before the court that the CBI inquiry was going to be used against his client in the coming assembly elections by the UPA government at the Centre to malign and damage him politically during the elections.
The apex court directed Mr Yadav, his MP son Akhilesh Yadav, his daughter-in-law Dimple Yadav and younger son Prateek Yadav to file proper review petitions against the judgement dated March 1, 2007 directing the CBI to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the isproportionate assets allegedly acquired by Mr Yadav and his family members through corrupt means by misusing his status as Chief Minister.
The petitioner Vishwanath Chaturvedi, a UP congress activist, had alleged that Mr Yadav and his family members had acquired assets worth over Rs 100 crore through corrupt means and they were liable to be prosecuted under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The Samajwadi Party supremo in his application filed yesterday had accused Congress President Sonia Gandhi of waging proxy litigation to settle political scores with him and sought stay of a CBI inquiry till May 31, 2007, by which date the seven-phased assembly elections in the state will be over.
The court had directed the CBI to hold preliminary inquiry to ascertain whether prima facie case against Mr Yadav was made out and submit its report to the Central government, which will decide the future course of action.
Normally an investigating agency decides on its own whether to register a regular case and if case is registered than the chargesheet is to filed in the competent court and the Central government has no role to play in the criminal investigation.
In the present case, the apex court has made a departure from the normal legal procedure.
UNI
A Bench, comprising Justices A R Lakshmanan and Altamas Kabir, said the application for directions was nothing but a review petition filed in guise of an application, which was not permissible under the rules of the apex court.
The Chief Minister's counsel Altaf Ahmed contended before the court that the CBI inquiry was going to be used against his client in the coming assembly elections by the UPA government at the Centre to malign and damage him politically during the elections.
The apex court directed Mr Yadav, his MP son Akhilesh Yadav, his daughter-in-law Dimple Yadav and younger son Prateek Yadav to file proper review petitions against the judgement dated March 1, 2007 directing the CBI to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the isproportionate assets allegedly acquired by Mr Yadav and his family members through corrupt means by misusing his status as Chief Minister.
The petitioner Vishwanath Chaturvedi, a UP congress activist, had alleged that Mr Yadav and his family members had acquired assets worth over Rs 100 crore through corrupt means and they were liable to be prosecuted under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The Samajwadi Party supremo in his application filed yesterday had accused Congress President Sonia Gandhi of waging proxy litigation to settle political scores with him and sought stay of a CBI inquiry till May 31, 2007, by which date the seven-phased assembly elections in the state will be over.
The court had directed the CBI to hold preliminary inquiry to ascertain whether prima facie case against Mr Yadav was made out and submit its report to the Central government, which will decide the future course of action.
Normally an investigating agency decides on its own whether to register a regular case and if case is registered than the chargesheet is to filed in the competent court and the Central government has no role to play in the criminal investigation.
In the present case, the apex court has made a departure from the normal legal procedure.
UNI
Oneindia Login