ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

HC rejects CBI's plea for long adjournment in corruption case against Kesri

The Delhi high court today rejected the demand of the Central Bureau of Investigation for a long adjournment and directed its superintendent of police to be present on the next date of hearing to explain certain details about the probe into alleged charges of bribing Bihar MLAs to get elected to the Rajya Sabha against former Congress chief Sitaram Kesri.

A division bench, comprising Justice Arun Kumar and Justice Manmohan Sarin, declined the prayer of counsel for CBI Harsh V Pratap Singh for an eight-month adjournment of the case, on the plea that Additional Solicitor General Altaf Ahmed, who has been dealing the case, was busy with the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case in the Supreme Court.

Expressing its dissatisfaction over the absence of any CBI officers in the court, the bench directed the counsel to ensure the presence of the CBI SP along with standing counsel for CBI, A Mariaputham, on the next date of hearing on November 30.

Perusing the reply of the CBI, filed in a sealed cover, to the court's queries raised during the last hearing, the bench asked the CBI to state what steps it had taken to get certain information from the Central Board for Direct Taxes, Enforcement Directorate and the income-tax department. The judges said the reply only states that some communications have been carried out with these departments.

''We are not concerned with the reminders to the departments, we want to know what steps have been taken,'' the judges observed.

The presence of the CBI SP was required for satisfying the court about the queries raised during the last two hearings, the judges said.

To the prayer of the CBI counsel for an eight-week adjournment to enable the ASG to be present in the court, the bench said, ''We shall review the situation on November 30 after hearing the CBI SP and then decide whether the presence of Ahmed was required.''

The directions came during the hearing of a public interest petition filed by Patna-based freelance journalist Madhuresh Kumar seeking a probe against Kesri for amassing wealth disproportionate to his known source of income and giving and receiving bribes during his election to the upper house of Parliament.

The court had, on the last date of hearing, directed the SP, CBI to analyse the AICC accounts and books of accounts properly and inform the court about its outcome by today.

The bench had found that the CBI's probe of the income tax returns of the All India Congress Committee did not reflect anything which would establish that the household expenses of Kesri were borne by the AICC, which was contrary to the submission made by the former Congress president during the course of arguments.

''This falsifies the submission of Kesri that the expenditure on him were incurred from the AICC,'' the judges had observed.

The bench also questioned the CBI's conclusion that since the AICC was not entitled for rebate on the expenses made on Kesri, the income tax returns do not reflect any such information.

''The issue was not whether the AICC was entitled for rebate, but whether the financial records of the AICC carries any noting regarding the expenses made on Kesri,'' the bench observed, and asked the CBI, ''Does any book of account show this expenditure being met from AICC.''

The judges were of the view that certain documents in the case do reflect that money was spent on Kesri. It was submitted during the course of hearing that the AICC had incurred substantial expenditure of Rs 2.5 million on Kesri for managing his household expenses.

The high court, on July 15, had directed the ,,cbi to further probe as to whether the source of the huge assets amassed by Kesri's son Amarnath Kesri was relatable to his father and asked the agency to inform within two months if the alleged offence of bribing Bihar MLAs warranted the registration of a CBI case.

The court had also asked the CBI to inform the income tax authorities about the unexplained assets of the son of Kesri and know from them, within two months of the furnishing of the information, the action taken on it. The court further directed the CBI to examine the income tax returns of Kesri and the Congress party between September 1988 and November 1996 to know as to whether Kesri's household expenses was borne out by the party from there or not.

The court had concluded by observing that ''the CBI knows it too well that offering bribe to a public servant was an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Since some MLAs have directly alleged making of such offer in connection with the election of Kesri, should a case be not registered? Let the CBI give further thought to it and let us know the result.''

UNI

Tell us what you think of this report