SC to hear Rafale review petition in open court

Earlier the top court said that it was not its job to go into the issue of pricing of Rafale fighter planes.

Update: 2019-02-26 13:13 GMT
The first is that the price contracted by the present government to buy 36 Rafale jets is 2.86 per cent cheaper than that negotiated to buy 136 of the same aircraft by the UPA government earlier. (Representational image)

New Delhi: Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed for an open court hearing of the Rafale review petitions.

The order was passed by a three-judge bench comprising of Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice KM Joseph.

The Supreme Court will be hearing review petition against its December 14, 2018, judgment in which it had refused to order a probe into the deal to procure 36 Rafale fighter planes from France.

On January 2, petitioners in Rafale fighter jet deal case — Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie, both former Union Ministers, and Prashant Bhushan, a noted lawyer — had moved the apex court for review of its Rafale judgment of December 14.
They had asked for recalling of the judgement and had also sought an oral hearing in the open court for their review plea.

Their petition states that the December 14 verdict contained several errors and also it relied upon patently incorrect claims made by the Government in an unsigned note given in a sealed cover to the court, which is a violation of the principle of natural justice.

They also alleged that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had signed an agreement for 36 Rafale jets on April 10, 2015, without any such requirement of 36 jets being given by the Air Force Headquarters and without the approval of the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC), which are the mandated first steps for any defence procurement.

Earlier, on December 14 last year, the apex court had dismissed all petitions seeking court-monitored probe into Rafale fighter jet deal with France, saying that there was no occasion to doubt the decision-making process in the deal. The top court had also said that it was not its job to go into the issue of pricing of fighter planes.

Similar News