Supreme Court agrees to hear plea seeking review of Rafale verdict
The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a plea seeking review of its verdict in the Rafale case. Former Union ministers Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie and senior advocate Prashant Bhushan had earlier moved the top court, seeking review of its December 14 judgment on the deal. The petitioners alleged that the court relied upon “incorrect claims” made by the Centre. Prashant Bhushan also sought a hearing on the plea seeking perjury prosecution of some officials for misleading the court in Rafale case.
On December 14, the apex court ruled that it found no evidence of wrongdoing in the government’s decision-making process, as it rejected petitions for an investigation into the Rafale deal. The court had rejected a batch of petitions for an investigation into India’s purchase of 36 French-made Rafale fighter jets, saying it found no evidence of wrongdoing in the government’s decision-making process or in the choice of Reliance Infrastructure Ltd as the Indian partner and refused to go into pricing details.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said four applications or petitions have been filed in the Rafale matter and one of them is still lying with the registry on account of the defect.
“The combination (of the judges) of bench will have to be changed. It is very difficult. We will do something for it,” the bench, also comprising Justices L N Rao and Sanjiv Khanna, said when Bhushan sought urgent listing of the petitions in the Rafale case.
Bhushan said that the review petition filed by AAP Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Singh was defective and other petitions had no defects to be cured.
He also said that besides the review petition, an application seeking perjury prosecution against some central government employees for giving misleading information to the court has also been filed.
Besides Bhushan, Sinha and Shourie had moved the Supreme Court Monday seeking initiation of perjury proceedings against central government officials for allegedly giving “false or misleading” information in a sealed cover in the high-profile Rafale case.