The Supreme Court on Thursday maintained it would not review its order scrapping the FIR against BSP chief Mayawati in the disproportionate assets case.
The court order, however, gave a handle to the CBI to pursue an independent case in the matter as the bench clarified that its July 6, 2012 order did not deal with the merit of the DA case investigation, which was never in dispute before it. Deciding a petition seeking review of the July 2012 order, Bench of Chief Justice P Sathasivam and Dipak Misra said, “We have not gone into any other aspect relating to the claim of CBI, intervener, or the stand of the writ petitioner (Mayawati) except the directions relating to Taj Heritage Corridor Project which was the only dispute before us in writ petition.”
The review petition was filed by one Kamlesh Verma, an intervener in the case, who was of the opinion that the Court ignored the voluminous material gathered against Mayawati, sufficient for the CBI to continue its probe against her.
Finding this argument to be a repetition, the bench said, “As the very same point has been urged once again, in the light of the principles noted above, we are of the view that the same are impermissible.” But the clarification of the court was sufficient to suggest that the DA case was set aside in context of earlier decisions relating to Taj Corridor Project. However, the court did not consider the merit of the DA case as it was not an issue decided in the previous proceeding.
The July 2012 order was passed on a petition filed by Mayawati alleging that the DA case against her was on account of political victimisation by the UPA Government at the Centre. She had alleged that while monitoring the Taj Corridor scam, the Court on September 18, 2003 directed registration of a single FIR. However, two FIRs were filed and the one related to DA case had no judicial sanction.
The apex court accepted her plea and held that CBI exceeded its jurisdiction to file the second FIR when the mandate of court order was to register a case with regard to the Taj Corridor scam alone. The FIR and the investigation thereafter were quashed as unwarranted and without jurisdiction.
The intervener, who was represented by senior advocate Shanti Bhushan, argued that the July 6 order required to be set aside. Reading out orders passed by the apex court during monitoring of the Taj Heritage Corridor scam, Bhushan said that the CBI was regularly allowed time by the court to submit separate reports in sealed cover relating to the disproportionate assets acquired by Mayawati.