The Delhi High Court Friday sought the CBI response on BJP MP Maneka Gandhi’s plea difficult a trial courtroom order rejecting its closure report in a graft case against her and two others and directing additional investigation in the matter.
Justice Yogesh Khanna, whereas issuing discover to the CBI and looking for its stand on Gandhi’s plea, additionally put on maintain the particular courtroom’s February 4 order to the extent it directs the company to put the fabric it has earlier than the sanctioning authority for her prosecution.
According to the graft case lodged against the BJP chief and two others in 2006, that they had allegedly sanctioned Rs 50 lakh as grant to a belief in a fraudulent method.
The CBI advised the excessive courtroom throughout the transient listening to that the particular courtroom, on submitting of closure report, has three programs of motion — settle for it, reject it and order additional probe or direct putting materials earlier than the sanctioning authority for sanction.
The particular courtroom can’t order additional probe and likewise direct putting of fabric earlier than sanctioning authority, the CBI counsel mentioned and added that the company was in a method being “forced to file a charge sheet”.
The company additional advised the excessive courtroom that the particular courtroom additionally didn’t lay down any parameters for finishing up the additional investigation.
The CBI counsel advised to the excessive courtroom that the particular courtroom’s observations be quashed and the matter be despatched again to it.
Gandhi’s counsel advised the excessive courtroom that that is the second time the CBI has filed a closure report in the case and the company has acknowledged that it has no prosecutable proof.
However, the particular courtroom rejected the CBI closure report and directed it to put the fabric it has earlier than the sanctioning authority for looking for sanction for prosecution, her lawyer mentioned.
He additionally advised the excessive courtroom that subsequent to the particular courtroom route, CBI has positioned some materials earlier than the sanctioning authority.
After listening to each side, the excessive courtroom stayed the particular courtroom order to the extent it directs CBI to put materials earlier than sanctioning authority and search sanction, and listed Gandhi’s plea for additional listening to on February 8, 2021.
The particular CBI courtroom, in its February 4 order, had mentioned it was of the prima facie opinion that there was felony conspiracy and felony misconduct by a public servant and had directed the probe company to analyze the case additional.
CBI had first filed a closure report in the case in 2008 as nicely and the particular courtroom had additionally rejected it then and ordered additional investigation.
Thereafter, it once more filed a closure report which was rejected by the particular courtroom in February this 12 months.