The Supreme Court Friday reserved its verdict on the petitions challenging its 14th December judgment upholding the deal for the purchase of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France as former Union ministers Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan Friday sought from the apex court to set aside its earlier verdict that dismissed their petition for criminal investigation into the case.
The Supreme Court Friday reserved its verdict on the petitions challenging its 14th December judgment upholding the deal for the purchase of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France as former Union ministers Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan Friday sought from the apex court to set aside its earlier verdict that dismissed their petition for criminal investigation into the case.
The latest development comes a day after the central government rejected allegations that it suppressed material facts and misled the apex court in connection with the case.
Rejecting the allegations Thursday, the Centre had stated that the application for perjury filed by the review petitioners was “completely misconceived” and that their stand was “vacillating and self-contradictory”.
The government had said that “on facts as well, the contention of the petitioners” that government officials “have made false statements and suppressed evidence while submitting information on ‘decision-making process’, ‘offsets’ and ‘pricing’ pursuant to orders passed by this court, is completely false, baseless and an attempt to intimidate government servants from performing their duty… on this ground alone, the application is liable to be dismissed”.
The affidavit, filed by the Director General (Acquisition) in the Ministry of Defence, had stated that “there is no act of perjury involved in the submissions made before the Supreme Court as the submissions are based on records”.
The affidavit also alleged that petitioners were “deliberately providing incomplete and selective information” and altering the sequence of events of procurement process to misled the apex court and the public.
The latest development comes a day after the central government rejected allegations that it suppressed material facts and misled the apex court in connection with the case.
Rejecting the allegations Thursday, the Centre had stated that the application for perjury filed by the review petitioners was “completely misconceived” and that their stand was “vacillating and self-contradictory”.
The government had said that “on facts as well, the contention of the petitioners” that government officials “have made false statements and suppressed evidence while submitting information on ‘decision-making process’, ‘offsets’ and ‘pricing’ pursuant to orders passed by this court, is completely false, baseless and an attempt to intimidate government servants from performing their duty… on this ground alone, the application is liable to be dismissed”.
The affidavit, filed by the Director General (Acquisition) in the Ministry of Defence, had stated that “there is no act of perjury involved in the submissions made before the Supreme Court as the submissions are based on records”.
The affidavit also alleged that petitioners were “deliberately providing incomplete and selective information” and altering the sequence of events of procurement process to misled the apex court and the public.