CBI clean chit to Mulayam Singh Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav in disproportionate assets case
New Delhi, May 21: The CBI has informed the Supreme Court that it has given a clean chit to Samajwadi Party patron Mulayam Singh Yadav and his family members in a disproportionate assets case of 2013 as sufficient evidence to support the allegations could not be brought out.
The agency in an affidavit filed before the court said that no prima facie there was no evidence of commission of cognisable offence against Yadav, his sons Akhilesh and Prateek and daughter-in-law Dimple.
On March 25, the Supreme Court had directed the CBI to apprise it of the status of probe in the alleged disproportionate assets case.
"The CBI has filed a reply on the status of the case on May 10 in the Supreme Court in a petition filed in the court this year relating to the matter," CBI spokesperson Nitin Wakankar said.
The preliminary enquiry was closed on August 7, 2013 in accordance with the directions of the Supreme Court in its order dated December 13, 2012, the agency said in the affidavit.
"On careful examination of documents, statement of witnesses and the version of the suspects during the course of further enquiry sufficient evidence to support the allegations of possessions of disproportionate assets jointly or individually against Mulayam Singh Yadav and his family members could not be brought out," it said.
The CBI said the Central Vigilance Commission was communicated about the decision taken in the preliminary enquiry on October 8, 2013 along with reasons for difference in the computation of assets in the earlier finding of 2007 vis-a-vis the enquiry report of 2013.
"Since no prima facie evidence of commission of cognisable offence against the suspects was found during the enquiry, it was not converted into an FIR and as such no enquiry was conducted in the matter after August 7, 2013," the CBI said.
Petitioner Vishwanath Chaturvedi, who has been pursuing the matter since 2005, had filed a fresh petition seeking a direction to the CBI to place the status report on probe either before the apex court or before a magisterial court in the assets case against the three SP leaders.
Chaturvedi, in 2005, had filed the PIL in the top court seeking a direction to the CBI to take appropriate action to prosecute Yadav, Akhilesh and his wife Dimple, and Prateek under the Prevention of Corruption Act for allegedly acquiring assets more than the known source of their income by misusing their power of authority.
The top court in March asked the probe agency to file a report within two weeks and said that "there was a status report (of 2007 by CBI) saying that prima facie case is made out. We are entitled to know as to what happened to the investigation".
Rejecting the pleas of senior advocate C A Sundaram, appearing for the Samajwadi Party (SP) patriarch and his family, the bench said, "Why should we not ask CBI as to what happened in terms of orders issued in 2007...We would like to know the status of the probe."
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Sujit Nair raises concerns over speculation of DMK-AIADMK understanding to block TVK
Chennai: Journalist and political commentator Sujit Nair has expressed concern over speculation that the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam could explore a post-poll understanding to prevent Vijay-led Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam from forming the government in Tamil Nadu.
In a social media post, Sujit Nair said the election verdict in Tamil Nadu reflected a clear public demand for political change and argued that the mandate should be respected irrespective of political preferences.
Referring to reports and political discussions surrounding a possible understanding between the DMK and AIADMK, he said he hoped such developments remained only speculative conversations and did not turn into reality.
Nair stated that if such an alliance were to take shape, it would raise serious questions about ideological politics in the country. He said TVK had emerged through a democratic electoral process and that the legitimacy to govern in a parliamentary democracy comes from the people’s verdict.
According to him, attempts to prevent an electoral winner from forming the government through unexpected political arrangements may be constitutionally valid, but many people could view them as politically opportunistic.
He further said that such a move could particularly affect the political image of the DMK, which has historically projected itself around ideology, social justice and opposition politics. Nair said that in ideological terms, the DMK appeared closer to TVK than to the AIADMK, and joining hands with its long-time political rival only to remain in power could weaken its broader political narrative.
He added that the same questions would apply to the AIADMK as well, as the party had spent decades positioning itself against the DMK and such an arrangement could create discomfort among its cadre and supporters.
Drawing a comparison with Maharashtra politics in 2019, Nair said he had expressed similar views when the Shiv Sena formed an alliance with the Indian National Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party after the Assembly elections.
He said post-poll alliances between long-standing political rivals often create a public perception that ideology and electoral mandates become secondary when political power equations come into play.
Nair also said such developments increase public cynicism towards politics and reinforce the belief among voters that ideology is often sidelined after elections.
He maintained that the Tamil Nadu verdict was emphatic and said respecting both the spirit and substance of the mandate was important for the credibility of democratic politics.
