The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petition seeking a copy of the closure report filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the allegations of amassing disproportionate assets against former Uttar Pradesh Chief Ministers, late Mulayam Singh Yadav and his son Akhilesh Yadav.
The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice P.S. Narasimha disposed of the plea for want of merit.
The Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the report was placed before the Central Vigilance Commission. When cognisable offence was made out, then the report copy had to be provided, he contended.
However, the Bench led by the CJI , after taking in consideration the Apex Court’s 2007 and 2012 verdicts on the matter, besides the fact that CBI had closed the enquiry on August 7, 2013 and submitted a report to the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) in 2013, dismissed the plea.
The top court of the country further noted that the petition was filed in 2019, six years after CBI closed investigation in the matter.
In 2019, the national agency had filed an affidavit in the Apex Court, stating that following the Supreme Court verdict of December 13, 2012, it had conducted further enquiry into the Preliminary Enquiry (PE) and found that the allegations against the respondent(s), of allegedly having acquired disproportionate assets to their known source of income, could not be substantiated
The 21-page affidavit said the national agency, after conducting further probe in a fair and impartial manner, had independently taken a decision to close the probe against Mulayam, his two sons, Akhilesh and Prateek, along with others, in accordance with the 2012 verdict.
It further said that no prima facie evidence of commission of a cognisable offence was found against the accused and therefore, the PE was not converted into a criminal case/FIR. As such, no enquiry was conducted in the matter after August 7, 2013, it added.
The affidavit mentioned the 2012 verdict of the Apex Court, saying that the Apex Court had permitted the CBI to take such independent action, which it considered fit, on the basis of the enquiry conducted by it, without seeking any direction from any corner.