Akhilesh Yadav Disproportionate Assets Case: Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav got a big relief from the Supreme Court on Monday (March 13). The court declined to further hear the disproportionate assets case involving his father, late Mulayam Singh Yadav.
A bench headed by Chief Justice DY said that in 2013, the CBI had closed the case after preliminary investigation. Mulayam Singh Yadav has also passed away. That’s why there is no need for hearing now. The court also turned down the petitioner’s demand that the CBI be directed to give him a copy of the final report.
What is the matter?
In the year 2005, a lawyer named Vishwanath Chaturvedi made a case against the then Chief Minister of UP Mulayam Singh, his son Akhilesh Yadav, daughter-in-law Dimple Yadav and second son Prateek Yadav. A Public Interest Litigation was filed alleging that he had acquired more property. On March 1, 2007, the Supreme Court ordered the CBI to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the allegation. In October 2007, the CBI told the court that in the preliminary investigation it had found evidence to register a case. In 2012, the Supreme Court took Dimple out of the ambit of investigation. The investigation against Mulayam, Akhilesh and Prateek continued.
The petitioner asked for the report
In March 2019, the petitioner filed a new application alleging that the CBI has kept the case in cold storage. Therefore, the court should ask for a status report from the CBI. The bench of then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta, hearing the case, expressed surprise that even after 12 years no one is aware of the progress made in the investigation.
What was the answer of the CBI?
CBI gave a shocking answer saying that it did not find evidence to register a regular FIR in the initial investigation. Therefore, the investigation was closed in August 2013 itself. The CBI further wrote in its reply that it had informed the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) in October 2013, fulfilling its legal obligation. It also gave detailed reasons to the CVC for its decision to close the probe.
CVC’s denial
The petitioner sought the CBI report by filing an RTI application in the CVC, but the CVC replied that it did not have any such report. His application is being sent to the Chief Vigilance Officer of CBI. Contact them for further details. The petitioner claims that the CBI did not provide any information to him.
Get the more latest India news updates
