Taj case against BSP chief to go on

With the UP elections round the corner, BSP chief Mayawati today suffered a setback when the Supreme Court gave a green signal to a special court to prosecute her in the Rs 175-crore Taj corridor scam.

The court quashed a report recommending closure of the case against the former chief minister. In a unanimous judgment, Justice SB Sinha and Justice SH Kapadia rejected the status report submitted by the CBI.

The judges said only an earlier report of the CBI, which said that there was sufficient material against Mayawati be forwarded to the special court.

The apex court said neither the attorney general's report nor that of the chief vigilance commissioner, both of which gave Mayawati a clean chit, should be sent to the special court.

It said there was no difference of opinion among the members of the investigating team to prosecute the former UP chief minister and, therefore, there was no question of referring the matter to the attorney general (AG).

It said the AG's opinion was not required as the investigating officer, deputy legal adviser, DIG, joint director, additional legal adviser and the additional director of the CBI had all opined that a case was made out for prosecuting Mayawati.

Only the director of prosecution, senior public prosecutor and the CBI director had opined that the case be closed.

The central vigilance commission had, besides Mayawati, also recommended the prosecution of former state environment minister Naseemuddin Siddiqui and former state environment secretary RK Sharma, both of whom had been named by the CBI as key players in the scam.

The CVC had concurred with the CBI in closing the cases against former chief secretary of Uttar Pradesh DS Bagga, Mayawati's former personal secretary PL Puniya, former union environment secretary K C Mishra, state environment secretary VK Gupta and SC Vali, the MD of the PSU which was given the contract for the heritage corridor.

The court passed severe strictures against the functioning of the administration and the investigating agencies.

"If this state of affairs continued, the rule of law will be reduced to a rope of sand," the judgment said. The court pointed out that the public prosecutor should just conduct the trial and not interfere in the probe.

The court did not go into the merits of the case and left this to the special court. It discredited the claim of the CBI that the matter was referred to the attorney general as there were differences in the top investigative hierarchy.

The court said only the opinion of the person in charge of the police station was relevant. Except the director of prosecution, there was no difference of opinion as claimed by the CBI, it said.