Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The CJI-led bench of SC asked the Government to submit before the Court the pricing and strategic details of Rafale deal in sealed cover within 10 days. The bench expressed that it would like to be apprised to the details with regard to pricing/cost, advantages thereof.
On October 10, the bench had sought from the Attorney General the details of the steps involved in the decision leading to the new deal. The CJI led bench then clarified that the details so sought would not cover the pricing or the suitability ofthe equipment for the Indian Air Force, bearing in mind the sensitive nature of the matter. But in a change from the earlier stance, the Court today sought for pricing and strategies as well.
Today the bench allowed the contents of the note giving the details of the steps in the decision-making process leading to the contract for 36 Rafale jets to be furnished to the Counsel for the petitioners and the petitioners-in-person.
The AG objected to sharing of details of the deal including its pricing, by stating that it would be covered under Official Secrets Act. Considering the objection, the Court said that whatever documents that could be legitimately produced in public domain should be given to the petitioners and all other documents covered under the Official Secrets Act should be given to the Court in sealed cover. Further, the AG advanced that the details of Pricing have not even been laid down before the Parliament.
Also listed today was the PIL filed by former Union Ministers Yashwant Sinha and ArunShourie, along with lawyer Prashant Bhushan, for registration of FIR and Court-monitored investigation by CBI into corruption allegations in Rafale deal. When Prashant Bhushan pressed for CBI probe, the matter adjourned the matter to November 14.
The PIL alleges that in the Rafale deal there is prima facie evidence of commission of cognizable offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act by public servants occupying the highest of public offices in the country. Though the petitioners had filed a complaint on October 4 before the CBI alleging foul play in Rafale deal, no action was taken. It is alleged that the non-registration of FIR is apparently on account of the fact that the complaint pertains to corruption in the procurement for 36 Rafale aircrafts by the highest public servants in the country and there is extreme pressure on the CBI due to which it is unable to discharge the duties cast on it in a fair and impartial manner.
According Sinha, Shourie and Bhushan, in 2007, after going through the requisite procurement procedures at various levels, tenders were issued by the Ministry of Defence for the purchase of 126 fighter aircrafts and it was specified in the Request for Proposal that 18 of these aircrafts would be purchased from abroad in a ‘fly-away’ condition and the remaining 108 would be manufactured in India in the factory of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) with transfer of technology from the foreign vendor. After the financial bids, Dassault Company manufacturing the Rafale aircraft was declared the lowest tenderer and thereafter price negotiations began. These negotiations were at a very advanced stage (95% complete) by 25 march 2015, states the petition.
However, when the Prime Minister visited France in April 2015, a new deal was announced to purchase only 36 Rafale Aircrafts in a ‘fly-away’ condition without any transfer of technology and make in India. It later turned out that the new deal involved 50% of the value of the contract to be given as “offset contracts” to Indian companies and that the government informally told Dassault and the French government that the bulk of the offset contracts would have to be given RAL Company of Mr. Anil Ambaniwhich had just been set up. It was also alleged that the price of the aircrafts in the new deal has been increased from approximately 700 crores per aircraft to over 1600 crores per aircraft without any legitimate public interest.This act of unilaterally changing the deal by bypassing all laid down procedures was to ensure that Mr. Ambani could be brought in as an offset partner for the purpose of obtaining for him offsets worth thousands of crores, alleges the petition.
It is also stated that the French government as well as the Dassault Aviation Company were told that this contract of 36 ‘ready to fly’ aircraft will be only given to Dassault Aviation, if they gave the major part of the offset contracts in this dealto Mr. Anil Ambani’s company. The petitioners allege that the new deal was unilaterally announced without following any mandatory procurement procedure of the Defence Ministry.
The new deal gives undue benefit to Reliance Aerospace Limited (RAL), and the escalation of price of airplanes is to account for collateral considerations, alleges the petition. This would amount to “Criminal Misconduct” under section 13(1) (d) (ii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, as applicable on the date of commission of offence.
It is further stated that the public servants presiding over the government got the critical persons involved and Contract Negotiation Committee to increase the contract price of the 36 Rafale aircrafts from Rs. 715 crore per aircraft as disclosed by Mr.Parrikar to Rs. 1660 crore per aircraft. This resulted in a pecuniary advantage to both, Dassault Aviation and also Mr. Ambani’s RAL This amounts to Criminal Misconduct under section 13(1) (d)(iii) of the applicable Prevention of Corruption Act.
The petitioner’s state that their complaint filed before CBI on October 4 reveals commission of congnizable offences under PC Act, and the CBI was bound to register FIR and carry out investigation as per the dictum of Constitution Bench in Lalitha Kumar case. Even no preliminary enquiry has been initiated till date, laments the petition.
Therefore, the PIL has sought to direct CBI to register FIR and initiate probe into the deal under the supervision of the SC. It also seeks to direct the Central Government to to cease and desist from influencing or intimidating in any way the officials that would investigate the offences disclosed in the complaint. It was prayed in the petition that the CBI officials handling the investigation should not be transferred or taken off charge and they should submit periodic status reports before the SC regarding the probe.
86540
103860
630
114
59824