The Supreme court on Monday asked BJP leader Subramanian Swamy to satisfy it on the maintainability of his plea seeking an SIT probe into the death of Congress MP Shashi Tharoor's wife Sunanda Pushkar.
The apex court was hearing Swamy's appeal against the Delhi High Court's October 26 verdict dismissing his plea for a court-monitored SIT probe into Sunanda's death. Pushkar was found dead under mysterious circumstances in a suite of a five-star hotel in Delhi on the night of January 17, 2014.
“Before going into the merits, we need to be satisfied on the maintainability (of the plea),” a Bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra and Amitava Roy told Swamy.
Pointing out that Sunanda died an “unnatural death” when a probe was on into financial irregularity in into Indian Premier league (IPl), Swamy said, “ “It took one year for Delhi Police to lodge an FIR. The autopsy report says it was an unnatural death. The FIR says it was a murder. Nothing has been done,” he told the court, adding that he had thereafter moved the high court.”
When the asked Swamy about the conclusion of the police in Sunanda's death, he contended that the FIR said it was an unnatural death based on the post-mortem report.
“The police must have come to a conclusion by now. The question is of maintainability of the plea,” the Bench said, after which Swamy said it was a matter of “public interest”.
On the issue of maintainability, the BJP leader said he had appeared in many cases involving politicians, including former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister late J Jayalalithaa.
The Bench thereafter referred to the conclusions arrived at by the High Court on Swamy's plea and said, “in view of the findings by the Delhi High Court, we need to be satisfied on the aspect of maintainability”.
The Bench asked him to first argue on the maintainability of the plea and posted the matter for hearing after three weeks. The High Court had last year rejected Swamy's plea for a court-monitored
SIT probe into Pushkar's death and termed his public interest litigation (PIl) as a “textbook example of a political interest litigation”.
Swamy, in his plea before the High Court, had alleged that the police had “botched up” the probe and accused Tharoor of “interfering” in the investigation as a Minister in the erstwhile UPA regime and later.