In the Rafale Deal Fighter Aircraft case, the review petition began again after the lunch in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court refused to hear the petition on Sanjay Singh. During the hearing on the Rafael case, the Supreme Court refused to take any additional documents related to the fighter aircraft.
Attorney General KK Venugopal told the Supreme Court that some documents were stolen by an employee from the Ministry of Defense. He said that we are dealing with defence procurements which include security of the state. This is a very sensitive matter. In the Rafael Jet case, petitioner Prashant Bhushan told the Supreme Court that in the cases of the Coalgate and 2G scam, I brought the document from an informant.
In the Rafael case, the next hearing will be held on March 14 in the Supreme Court. Today’s proceedings have been postponed. The court said that the statement given by Leader Sanjay Singh on the Supreme Court’s judgments is quite humiliating. After hearing the Rafale Review petition and giving Singh a chance to explain to the court, action will be taken against Sanjay Singh for abusive comments.
During the hearing, Justice Joseph said that even if the documents that were stolen are referred and if it is found relevant, then the court can look into it. Attorney General K.K. Venugopal said that if the CBI inquiry is ordered now, then the country will suffer huge losses. He told the court that an FIR was not registered in the case of theft of documents related to Rafale deal. The source of the document should be disclosed by those who published it.
CJI said that the main question is whether the court should consider the evidence of the document if there is a hint of corruption. The attorney general said that it should not be taken into account, because it is related to defence secrets.
Earlier, in the Supreme Court, Attorney General K.K. Venugopal said that Hindu newspaper, petitioner Bhushan and others are relying on the documents obtained by theft, for which they will have to face prosecution under the official confidentiality act. He further added, what has been done is a crime and that they are protesting because these documents can not be considered. The review should be rejected.