No probe in Rafale deal: SC dismisses review plea
Judges ask Gandhi to be more careful, say no court should be dragged into politics
The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to review its 2018 order that dismissed pleas seeking a court-monitored probe of alleged irregularities in the ₹59,000 crore Rafale fighter jet deal, reiterating its earlier decision that it was not for the court to determine the price at which aircraft are bought — a move the government said vindicated its stand.
“Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss the review petition on Rafale is a befitting reply to those leaders and parties who rely on malicious and baseless campaigns.Today’s decision, yet again, reaffirms Modi sarkar’s credentials as a govt which is transparent and corruption free,” home minister and Bharatiya Janata Party president Amit Shah tweeted.
In a unanimous verdict — written by justice SK Kaul for himself and Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, and a separate concurrent judgment by KM Joseph — the court said that unless there was an error on record, review applications did not need to be entertained. The judges also corrected an “error” in its December 14, 2018 judgment.
“We cannot lose sight of the fact that we are dealing with a contract for aircrafts, which was pending before different Governments for quite some time and the necessity for those aircrafts has never been in dispute,” the court said in the verdict by justices Kaul and Gogoi, refusing to embark on a “roving and fishing enquiry”. “We are, thus, of the view that the review petitions are without any merit and are accordingly dismissed.”
In his concurring judgment, justice Joseph said that the verdict would not stand in the way of the CBI taking action in the case on its own, after getting the necessary permissions from the government in accordance with the law. He, however, noted that under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, prior approval of investigation is required, and according to the apex court’s judgment in the 2013 Lalita Kumari case, FIR in corruption cases have to be registered after a preliminary inquiry if the information is unclear about a cognizable offence. Such an inquiry was not asked for in the petitions.
The Congress claimed that Joseph’s observation paved the way for a “comprehensive criminal investigation” into the case and called for a Joint Parliamentary Committee probe. “Justice Joseph of the Supreme Court has opened a huge door into investigation of the Rafale scam. An investigation must now begin in full earnest. A JPC must also be set up to probe this scam,” Gandhi tweeted.
: “Mr Gandhi needs to be more careful in the future,” the Supreme Court said on Thursday, dismissing a criminal contempt case against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi for attributing to the court a slogan he repeatedly used during this summer’s Lok Sabha election: “Chowkidar Chor Hai” (the watchman is a thief).
Deciding a criminal contempt plea fled against Gandhi by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Meenakshi Lekhi, a threejudge bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) R Gogoi, and justices SK Kaul and K M Joseph cautioned Gandhi : “No court should be dragged into this political discourse valid or invalid, while attributing aspects to the Court which had never been held by the Court.”
On April 10, Gandhi, during an election meeting in Uttar Pradesh’s Amethi, said : “Supreme Court has made it clear that “chowkidarji chor hai.”
Gandhi’s slogan was a riff off
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s statement in 2014 that he was a chowkidar who would not allow any corruption on his watch.
Ahead of the parliamentary elections, Gandhi raised the issue of the Rafale deal signed by the National Democratic Alliance government, replacing one signed by the previous Congressled United Progressive Alliance government. He alleged that the deal was more expensive, and done to benefit Anil Ambani’s Reliance Defence.
The Supreme Court, in December 2018 said it was satisfied that due process had been followed in the deal. However, on April 10, the apex court allowed former Union ministers
Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie and advocate Prashant Bhushan to rely on leaked documents to argue their review petitions. Gandhi’s comments came soon after.
Lekhi, in her contempt petition, pleaded that Gandhi had “replaced his personal statement as Supreme Court’s order and tried to create prejudice.” She complained “the words used and attributed by him (Gandhi) to the SC in the Rafale case has been made to appear something else. He is replacing his personal statement as SC’s order and trying to create prejudice.”
Gandhi, in response, filed a 22-page affidavit and expressed regret. However, the court was not satisfied with the regret affidavit and asked him to apologise.
Subsequently, in May, Rahul Gandhi filed a two-page affidavit offering an unconditional apology and it was this affidavit which was considered by the court for dropping the criminal contempt case against him.
Denouncing Gandhi’s statement, the court said on Thursday: “It is unfortunate that without verification or even perusing as to what is the order passed, the contemnor deemed it appropriate to make statements as if this Court had given an imprimatur to his allegations against the Prime Minister, which was far from the truth. This was not one sentence or a one off observation but a repeated statement in different manners conveying the same. No doubt the contemnor should have been far more careful.”
BJP president Amit Shah said, without naming Gandhi, that an apology was due over the controversy. “Now, it has been proved that disruption of Parliament over Rafale was a sham...after today’s rebuke from the SC, Congress and its leader, for whom politics is above national interest, must apologise to the nation,” Shah said.
Representatives of the Congress did not speak on the defamation case outcome although they pointed to a concurrent judgment in the main plea and said the Supreme Court had left the door open for an investigation by an agency.