The petitioner said that mere quashing of the CBI FIR on technical grounds could not come in the way of application of the rule of law
The CBI on Wednesday said it has no fresh material to register an FIR against former Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mayawati in a case of disproportionate assets, but the Supreme Court said it will examine the fresh material brought forward by petitioner Kamlesh Verma.
As the bench of Justice Anil R. Dave and Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel admitted the public interest litiagation for filing an FIR based on the fresh material, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told the court that there was nothing for the Central Bureau of Investigation to probe and the BSP leader has already been cleared by the income tax authorities.
The apex court had on January 17, 2014, issued notice to the Bahujan Samaj Party supremo on a PIL by Uttar Pradesh resident Kamlesh Verma, who sought the CBI be direc ted to register a first information report on the basis of fresh material Verma said he has collected.
The court issued notice to Mayawati on the PIL by Verma, over a year and a half after it quashed an earlier FIR by the CBI on technical grounds.
The apex court by its July 6, 2012, order quashed the CBI's FIR holding that by its order in the Taj Corridor case, it has not allowed the investigating agency to undertake roving inquiry against the BSP leader.
However, subsequently in May 2013, the apex court reserved its order on the plea seeking the recall of the court's July 6, 2012, verdict, and said its verdict in no way came in the way of the CBI to proceed in a different disproportionate assets case against the former chief minister.
The petitioner said he had moved the court for the prosecution of Mayawati, who was found to be allegedly possessing assets disproportionate to her known sources of income following investigation by the CBI.
He had said that the outcome of the CBI investigation has to be taken to its logical conclusion.
The petitioner said that mere quashing of the CBI FIR on technical grounds could not come in the way of application of the rule of law.
Petitioner Verma had told the court that he was seeking its intervention "to undo the wrong that has been done by the politically controlled investigating agencies of the country, in an attempt to protect a high profile political person like Mayawati".
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.