Rafale case: Will first decide preliminary objection raised by Centre, says Supreme Court

The Supreme Court reserved its order on the Centre's plea claiming privilege over the documents filed by petitioners - former Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha, journalist-turned politician Arun Shourie and activist-lawyer Prashant Bhushan - in connection with the Rafale case.

Rafale case: Will first decide preliminary objection raised by Centre, says Supreme Court
A French Rafale fighter jet lands on the aircraft carrier "Charles de Gaulle" on February 7, 2019 in the Mediterranean sea. (Photo by VALERY HACHE / AFP)
By: ABP News Bureau
Updated: 14 Mar 2019 05:09 PM
HIGHLIGHTS
  • The SC reserved its order on the government's plea claiming privilege over the documents filed by petitioners - Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and Prashant Bhushan.
  • The Supreme Court said it will decide first on the preliminary objections raised by the Centre and then go into the facts of the Rafale fighter jet deal case.
  • The top court asked the petitioners seeking review of its order to focus on the preliminary objections regarding admissibility of the leaked documents.
NEW DELHI: A day after the Centre told the Supreme Court that documents filed by the petitioners seeking review of its Rafale verdict are "sensitive to national security" and relate to war capacity of the combat aircraft, the top court on Thursday said it will decide first on the preliminary objections raised by the government and then go into the facts of the Rafale deal case.

After an hour-long hearing, the bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi reserved the order on the plea which also sought removal of the documents from the case records. It will be known later as to when the order will be pronounced on the issue.


"Only after we decide the preliminary objection raised by the Centre, we will go into the facts of the case," said the bench, also comprising Justices S K Kaul and K M Joseph.

At the outset, Attorney General K K Venugopal claimed privilege over documents pertaining to the Rafale fighter jet deal with France and told the Supreme Court that no one can produce them in the court without the permission of the department concerned. Venugopal referred to section 123 of the Evidence Act and provisions of RTI Act to buttress his claim.

He told the top court that no one can publish documents which relate to national security as the security of the State supercedes everything.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, one of the petitioners seeking review, opposed the submission and said that the Rafale deal documents, which AG says are privileged, have been published and are already in public domain.

Former Union minister Arun Shourie, who is one of the review petitioners, submitted that he was thankful to the Centre and the Attorney General for saying in their affidavit that these are photocopies, proving the genuineness of these documents.

Bhushan further said that provisions of RTI Act say public interest outweighs other things and no privilege can be claimed except for documents which pertain to intelligence agencies.

There is no government-to-government contract in purchasing Rafale jets as there is no sovereign guarantee extended to India by France in the Rs 58,000 crore deal, Bhushan said.

He also said the Press Council of India Act provides provisions for protecting sources of journalists.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for another petitioner Vineet Dhanda, said that the government cannot claim privilege on these documents.

The Centre had on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that the petitioners, who were seeking a review of the court's December 14 judgement giving a clean chit to the government in the Rafale deal, are guilty of leakage of sensitive information having a bearing on national security and combat capacity of the fighter jets.

In an affidavit, the government said the leaked information was now available to the "enemy/our adversaries", adding those who have conspired in this leakage were guilty of penal offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code.

The Centre had contended that the documents which were unauthorisedly photocopied belonged to a class for which it was "entitled to claim privilege under Section 123 and 124 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872."

Asserting that the petitioners had "no authority" to produce the documents before the court without its "explicit permission", the affidavit says that these documents are exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(a) of the Right to Information Act.

SHOP BY CATEGORIES

         
GET THE APP