By
Nitya Chakraboty
Amidst the countrywide euphoria over
the successful air strikes on terror camps in Pakistan, the Supreme Court has
opened a Pandora’s Box by agreeing to hold an open hearing on the review
petitions calling for the recall of the verdict given by the apex court on
December 14 last year. The decision of the SC bench headed by the Chief Justice
Ranjan Gogoi has extraordinary significance as it allows consideration by the
bench of the points made by the petitioners that the December 14 judgment was
based on the wrong and untruthful facts submitted by the Government in the
sealed envelope to the Court.
Further, the bench took an uncommon
decision to hold the hearings in an open court instead of its chamber, which is
generally done in such review cases. This gives credence to the fact that the
highest Court of the country has taken up this Rafale deal controversy very
seriously now as the Court’s image and especially the image of the Chief
Justice has got a beating as a result of the dismissal of the petitions earlier
and giving clean chit to the NDA government of the Prime Minister Narendra
Modi.
Now, the petitioners, especially the
Trio – Two former ministers Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie and the lawyer
Prashant Bhushan will be getting full opportunity in the open court to mention
of the erroneous facts given by the Government in their note submitted through the sealed envelope as
also the reports quoting the official documents which came out in media after
December 14 judgment pointing out the active involvement of the Prime Minister’s
Office in the decision making process on the Rafale deal overlooking the views
of the defence secretary. The date of the hearing has not yet been fixed but
indications are that it will be held soon and that will start a process when
the PM’s actions also in respect of precipitating the Rafale deal, will come to
limelight.
The most important aspect of the
petition submitted by the trio in revised form, mentions that the December 14
judgment relied on non-existent CAG report to give clean chit to the deal. The
petitioners want the recall of the judgment since the judgment based on a
hypothetical CAG report is not merely a clerical or arithmetical slip but a
substantial error. Since the apex Court has agreed to hear the petition, it
will be a tough task for the Government people including the attorney general
to defend the official position. The Court will decide on the basis of open
session hearings whether the December 14 judgment will be reviewed.
At this present juncture when no one
is questioning the Prime Minister and his policies in the wake of the sweep of
national sentiments, it will be interesting how the Supreme Court deals with
the petitioners arguments in the open hearing. The petitioners will certainly
request the presence of some retired officials for interrogation. Will the
Supreme Court allow that? In any case, the hearings will be very embarrassing
for the Modi government and also the Prime Minister himself in the present
period of the Government and the BJP led frenzy.
As senior advocate Indira Jaising has
pointed out a judgment based on facts which are false, is no judgment in the
eye of law. The remedy is to recall the judgment and go for a fresh hearing,
possibly by a different bench. The remedy is not a review of the judgment, much
less an application for “correction” of the judgment, as is sought to be done
by the Union Government.
This is perhaps the first time in
Indian legal history that the Government has told the Court how to rewrite its
own judgment, and which para to substitute for which one. Now comes the news,
with clear evidence in the form of the defence ministry note, that the
procedure for negotiating the deal was not followed.
One of the fist issues framed by the
Court was the question whether procedures prescribed for negotiating the deal
were followed. With regard to this, the Supreme Court in its December 14, 2018
order said:
“We have studied the material
carefully. We have also had the benefit
of interacting with senior Air Force Officers who answered Court queries in
respect of different aspects, including that of the acquisition process and
pricing. We are satisfied that there is no occasion to really doubt the
process, and even if minor deviations have occurred, that would not result in
either setting aside the contract or requiring a detailed scrutiny by the
Court. We have been informed that joint exercises have taken place, and that
there is a financial advantage to our nation. It cannot be
lost sight of, that these
are contracts of defence procurement
which should be subject to a different degree and depth of judicial review.
Broadly, the processes have
been followed. The need for the aircrafts is not in doubt. The quality
of the aircraft is not in question………”.
This clearly indicates that if
procedures were followed, there would be no case for entertaining the petition
any further. The converse is equally true — that if procedures were not
followed, the court would entertain the petition and consider directing the CBI
to register an FIR. Failure to follow procedure leads to a presumption that the
decision-making process was vitiated by extraneous considerations. The Supreme
Court bench has to go into all these and decide now. (IPA Service)
The post Ghost Of Rafale Deal Still Haunting Narendra Modi appeared first on Newspack by India Press Agency.
