NEW DELHI: The Centre is not keen on the Central Bureau of Investigation submitting to it a report on the preliminary enquiry into the "disproportionate assets" of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh and his family members.

Additional Solicitor-General Gopal Subramaniam has made this submission before the Supreme Court, which is hearing a batch of petitions filed by Mr. Singh, his two sons and daughter-in-law Dimple seeking a review of its March 1 order.

He was responding to a question from the Bench, consisting of Justices C.K. Thakker and Altamas Kabir, on the petitioners' objections to the March 1 order, particularly the direction to the CBI to submit its report to the Union of India.

Initially, to a question whether the Centre would make its stand even without a formal notice, Mr. Subramaniam said he would make his submissions without a formal notice.

Senior counsel K.T.S. Tulsi, appearing for Vishwanath Chaturvedi, on whose petition the court ordered the CBI probe, also said he would make his submissions without notice.

Mr. Subramaniam said: "We are not concerned with the merits of the matter. The Union of India has no role in the investigation. We do not want residual functions in any particular case. Whatever the political equations, the law must take its course. We leave it to the court whether to modify the order or not."

"Powers unfettered"

He said counsel for the petitioners had raised certain larger issues of far-reaching consequences. There was no merit in the argument that prior consent of the State Government was required before ordering a CBI enquiry. "If a State Government failed to enforce the rule of law, can't the court order a CBI probe?"

He said, "No State Government will give consent for a CBI probe for acts done within its territory."

Mr. Subramaniam said: "Whenever the High Court or the Supreme Court orders a CBI probe to protect the rule of law, such a direction will not impinge on the concept of federalism as the requirement of the statute will not apply in such a case." The court's powers were unfettered by the provisions of Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, which contemplated prior consent of the State Government.

The powers of the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution (under which a citizen can directly approach it) were not conditioned or restricted by any other statute provision.

The petitioners' contention that the Supreme Court could not order a CBI probe even under Article 142 (jurisdiction to pass any order for doing complete justice) was unfounded.

"If such an argument is to be accepted, Article 142 will become otiose."

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail