SC agrees to hear review petitions on Rafale verdict, dismisses Centre's objections on 'leaked' documents

In a jolt to the Centre, the Supreme Court Wednesday agreed to hear petitions for a review of its verdict in the Rafale jet deal on the basis of 'leaked' secret documents by dismissing its preliminary objections.

The apex court in its verdict on December 14 rejected demands for a court-monitored probe into the Rafale deal and gave a clean chit to the Modi government on procurement of 36 fighter jets from French company Dassault Aviation, holding there was no irregularity in the decision-making process, pricing or selection of Indian Offset Partner.

Dismissing the government's contention that sensitive documents accessed by the media on the Rafale deal can't be evidence by claiming privilege and that the petitions were not maintainable, the court Wednesday said it will examine the papers while reviewing on merits the review petitions.

As the court order gave fresh ammunition to the Congress and other opposition parties to attack the Modi government ahead of the Lok Sabha polls, senior advocate Vikas Singh, who had appeared for a petitioner Vineet Dhandha, said going by the judgement the court will look into various aspects of the deal including the issue of pricing and also selection of the Indian Offset Partner.

Delivering a 58-page unanimous verdict, the top court also went on to say that the publication of the said documents in The Hindu' newspaper reminded it of the consistent views of the court upholding the freedom of the press in a long line of decisions. The court said it will fix a date for hearing the review petitions.

Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad dismissed suggestions that the verdict was a setback or a jolt to the Centre, saying the merit of the case was yet to be decided.

The Centre had submitted that the three privilege documents which were unauthorisedly removed from the Defence Ministry was used by the petitioners to support their review petitions.

A three-judge bench delivered two separate but unanimous verdicts rejecting the objections raised by the Centre that those documents were not admissible as evidence under section Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act and no one can produce them in court without the permission of the department concerned as those documents are also protected under the Official Secrets Act.

Further, the Centre failed to impress a bench comprising Chief justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph that the disclosure of those documents were exempted under the Right to Information(RTI) Act as per Section 8(1)(a) and those who conspired in photocopying the papers committed theft and put national security in jeopardy.

Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, who wrote the judgement for himself and Justice Kaul, noted that all the three documents were in "public domain" and published by prominent daily, The Hindu was "in consonance with the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech."
Asked whether the court order is a setback for the government, Sitharaman said, "Not at all."