During arguments Nine payments amounting to Rs.40 Crores were assigned to Chief Minister of Gujarat, who is referred to as Modi Ji.
In a clear breather for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Supreme Court today rejected a plea for detailed probing alleged payoffs by the Birla-Sahara Group when he was the Gujarat Chief Minister.
The Apex Court Bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Amitava Roy today after hearing Prashant Bhushan, the counsel for Common Cause, and Mukul Rohatgi, the Attorney-General passed this order.
After length hearing it came to the conclusion that the Sahara-Birla documents indicating an alleged pay-off to the Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, and other named public servants, are not cogent and satisfactory enough to accept the plea for a Court-monitored independent investigation into it.
The hearing in the case began in the morning around 11 and continued in the afternoon till 3.30 p.m. The bench, then announced the order at 4 pm that there was no conclusive evidence in it.
The apex court observed that if it will start ordering investigation on the basis of material with no evidentiary value, then it would become difficult for constitutional functionaries to function. This will end lead to a situation which would not be safe for the democracy.
Bench was of the view that given the manner in which these documents have been collected and filed, in its opinion that it would not be safe and proper to order investigation.
Fresh affidavit was filed by ‘Common Cause’, an NGO, seeking a court- monitored SIT investigation into the raids on two business houses in 2013-14. It was alleged that bribery allegations are against politicians, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
This verdict is also being seen as a big setback for Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi and AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal who have lately refered to those IT raids while attacking Modi for his corrupt practices.
Justice Khehar heading the Bench last month had questioned the NGO for casting aspersions against the Prime Minister without placing “sufficient”, “firm” and “clear” evidentiory materials.
Related News @ LatestLaws.com-