The Supreme Court on Monday granted interim relief to Congress leader and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi in a case involving allegations of disproportionate assets.
The top court directed the Allahabad High Court to defer further proceedings in the matter for the time being. It also asked the CBI and Enforcement Directorate (ED) not to submit any report based on directions previously issued by the high court.
The case relates to a petition filed by Karnataka resident S Vignesh Shishir, who had approached the Allahabad High Court seeking an investigation into allegations concerning Gandhi’s assets.
Supreme Court Puts Allahabad HC Proceedings on Hold
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana heard Gandhi’s challenge against the Allahabad High Court’s earlier order.
The Supreme Court directed the high court to postpone its next hearing until the top court takes up the matter again.
The bench also issued notices to S Vignesh Shishir, the CBI and the ED, seeking their responses.
The Allahabad High Court had scheduled its next hearing for August 20.
CBI, ED Told Not to File Reports for Now
The Supreme Court also directed the CBI and ED not to submit any report in connection with the directions issued by the Allahabad High Court.
The move temporarily pauses the investigative process arising from the high court’s orders while the Supreme Court examines Gandhi’s challenge.
The case is still at a stage where the allegations have not been established as charges against Gandhi.
What Is the Case About?
The controversy began with a complaint filed by S Vignesh Shishir, who alleged that Rahul Gandhi possessed assets disproportionate to his known sources of income.
Shishir subsequently approached the Allahabad High Court seeking investigation by central agencies, including the CBI and ED.
The matter reached the high court’s Lucknow bench, which had sought information from the CBI regarding the progress of the complaint.
Gandhi later challenged the high court’s proceedings before the Supreme Court.
Kapil Sibal Calls Proceedings a ‘Witch-Hunt’
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Rahul Gandhi, strongly challenged the legal basis of the proceedings.
“This is absolutely unknown to law. This is a witch-hunt process which is not recognised by law,” Sibal told the Supreme Court, according to the proceedings.
Sibal also questioned whether Shishir had the necessary legal standing, or locus, to approach the high court.
He argued that the petitioner had not adequately established his credentials and questioned the basis on which the matter had proceeded.
Sibal Questions Why Agencies Had Not Acted Independently
Sibal also pointed out that the CBI had so far only carried out verification of the complaint.
He questioned why the investigating agencies had not independently taken action if the allegations disclosed a serious offence.
His argument was essentially that the agencies should not need a court direction to act if there was sufficient material indicating a cognisable offence.
Supreme Court Questions CBI’s Position
The bench also questioned the role of the central investigating agencies during the hearing.
Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, appearing for the CBI and ED, told the court that the agencies had not played a role in the case so far.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi questioned why an agency would remain inactive if the allegations were considered serious.
He also raised the question of whether the CBI requires a court order to begin action when a complaint itself indicates the possibility of a cognisable offence.
CJI Raises Natural Justice Issue
Chief Justice Surya Kant also referred to the principle of natural justice.
The Chief Justice observed that when a court decides to issue directions affecting a person, the principle of natural justice is expected to be followed.
In simple terms, the principle generally requires that a person affected by a legal decision should have an opportunity to be heard before adverse directions are passed.
This issue became important in the Supreme Court’s consideration of the Allahabad High Court proceedings.
Petitioner Defends His Case
S Vignesh Shishir appeared before the Supreme Court through video conference and opposed Rahul Gandhi’s plea.
He argued that the matter was still at the pre-FIR stage.
According to Shishir, an accused person does not necessarily have a right to be heard at that stage of a complaint.
He maintained that his petition sought an investigation into the allegations and that the proceedings had not yet reached the stage of a formal FIR against Gandhi.
What Had the Allahabad High Court Ordered?
The Supreme Court’s intervention follows a series of directions issued by the Allahabad High Court.
On July 20, the Lucknow bench expressed dissatisfaction with the CBI’s response regarding the complaint.
The high court directed a senior CBI officer to personally submit a fresh affidavit explaining the progress of the matter.
The court had found that the earlier affidavit did not fully comply with its previous directions and did not sufficiently explain the progress made on the complaint.
Senior CBI Officer Asked to File Fresh Affidavit
The Allahabad High Court directed the Joint Director or head of the concerned CBI zone at the Anti-Corruption headquarters in New Delhi to personally submit the fresh affidavit.
The purpose was to obtain a clearer account of what action had been taken on the complaint and what stage the verification process had reached.
Why Was the Case Being Heard Privately?
The Allahabad High Court had ordered that the case records remain under sealed cover in the custody of the senior registrar.
The proceedings were also being conducted in chambers instead of an open courtroom, with the high court citing the sensitive nature of the matter.
The court had also given the Union government four weeks to submit detailed counter-affidavits on behalf of several departments and agencies.
These included the Department of Personnel and Training, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Corporate Affairs and Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO).
What Happens Now?
The Supreme Court’s latest order means the Allahabad High Court will not proceed with the matter for now.
The CBI and ED have also been asked not to file reports based on the earlier high court directions.
The Supreme Court will now consider Rahul Gandhi’s challenge to the Allahabad High Court proceedings and examine the legal questions raised by both sides.
Importantly, the allegations of disproportionate assets remain allegations at this stage and have not been established by a court.
The next developments will depend on the responses filed by the petitioner, the central agencies and the other parties before the Supreme Court.
