<div style="float: left;">
	<img align="" alt="" class="imgCont" height="163" src="http://bsmedia.business-standard.com/_media/bs/img/article/2013-02/14/full/1360854986-6902.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #DDD; margin-right: 10px; padding: 1px; float: left; z-index: 0;" title="" width="218" />
	<div>
		The Supreme Court today directed Prashant Bhushan, counsel for the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), to disclose to it the name of the whistle blower who provided file notings and entry registers for CBI director Ranjit Sinha&rsquo;s official residence. The bench headed by Justice H L Dattu thus partly conceded a key request of Sinha &ndash; that the name of the person who leaked the information should be disclosed.&nbsp;</div>
	<div>
		&nbsp;</div>
	<div>
		However, Bhushan told the judges that he will consult the whistleblower and the governing body of CPIL about the court direction. The case will come up again on September 22.</div>
	<div>
		&nbsp;</div>
	<div>
		Bhushan submitted that the whistleblower must be protected as held by the court in several judgments. A draft law is pending Parliament&rsquo;s assent while a notification on the subject already protects whistleblowers. He said that the facts have already come to light and Sinha has in interviews admitted to the visits by several persons named in the entry register.</div>
	<div>
		&nbsp;</div>
	<div>
		He said that how the information was leaked out is not as important as the content itself. A whistleblower gives information at great risk to himself and history has shown how such persons have been victimized the world over, Bhushan argued, pointing that laws have been passed in several countries to protect such persons. When all facts can be verified from the documents before the court, the court should not go after the whistleblower, he said.&nbsp;</div>
	<div>
		&nbsp;</div>
	<div>
		Vikas Singh, counsel for Sinha, vehemently protested Bhushan&rsquo;s affidavits, which he called false and forged, and asked for criminal cases to be initiated against CPIL. Singh said that the court should ignore affidavits based on unknown sources since it is against court rules and several judgments. &ldquo;Bhushan is not above (the) law,&rdquo; he said.</div>
	<div>
		&nbsp;</div>
	<div>
		Sinha&rsquo;s lawyers alleged that certain vested interests are planting news in the media against Sinha to protect their own favourites. A Mumbai newspaper published details of the affidavit a day before the court hearing. All these showed the conspiracy in which even Bhushan might be protecting certain accused persons, Singh alleged.</div>
	<div>
		&nbsp;</div>
	<div>
		According to two sets of affidavits and visitors&rsquo; registers given by Bhushan to the judges, Sinha tried to stifle prosecution of accused persons in the 2G spectrum scam and Coalgate. He has purportedly given notings on files which showed that Sinha wanted to protect Reliance Communications and former telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran in spectrum allocations. The original entry registers given to Bhushan by certain persons on September 7 night contains the names of persons, including several persons in the accused list, who visited Sinha.</div>
	<div>
		&nbsp;</div>
</div>

The Supreme Court today directed Prashant Bhushan, counsel for the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), to disclose to it the name of the whistle blower who provided file notings and entry registers for CBI director Ranjit Sinha's official residence.

Reveal source of documents against CBI director: SC to Prashant Bhushan

Says it will go into the allegations only after knowing the source of the information

More From This Section

Flood alert issued in four districts in Bihar, Jharkhand

India Inc steps up to help J&K flood victims

Rains briefly hit relief efforts, another 60,000 evacuated

Kingfisher loan default only a trickle: Vinod Rai

Explore News