JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner herein-
Kamlesh Verma seeking review of the judgment and order dated
06.07.2012 passed in Mayawati vs. Union of India & Ors., 2012 8 SCC 106 (Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 135 of 2008).
(2.) Brief Facts:
(a) This Court, by order dated 16.07.2003 in I.A. No. 387 of
2003 in Writ Petition (C) No. 13381 of 1984 titled M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India & Ors.,2003 8 SCC 706, directed the CBI to
conduct an inquiry on the basis of the I.A. filed in the
aforesaid writ petition alleging various irregularities
committed by the officers/persons concerned in the Taj Heritage
Corridor Project and to submit a Preliminary Report. By means
of an order dated 21.08.2003 in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India, 2003 8 SCC 711, this Court issued certain directions to the
CBI to interrogate and verify the assets of the persons
concerned with regard to outflow of Rs. 17 crores which was
alleged to have been released without proper sanction for the
said Project.
(b) The CBI-Respondent No. 2 therein submitted a report on
11.09.2003 before this Court which formed the basis of order
dated 18.09.2003 titled M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India and Others, 2003 8 SCC 696wherein the CBI was directed to conduct
an inquiry with respect to the execution of the Taj Heritage
Corridor Project under Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) Area at Agra
which culminated into the registration of an FIR being No.
0062003A0018 of 2003 dated 05.10.2003 under Section 120-B read
with Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 (in short the IPC) and under Section 13(2) read with
Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in
short the PC Act) against several persons including Ms.
Mayawati-Respondent No. 1 herein.
(c) On the very same date, i.e., on 05.10.2003, Shri K.N.
Tewari, Superintendent of Police, CBI/ACP, Lucknow lodged
another FIR being RC No. 0062003A0019 of 2003 under Section
13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the PC Act only against Ms.
Mayawati (petitioner therein) alleging that in pursuance of the
orders dated 21.08.2003, 11.09.2003 and 18.09.2003 passed by
this Court, the CBI conducted an inquiry with regard to the
acquisition of disproportionate movable and immovable assets of
Ms. Mayawati and her close relatives on the basis of which, the
CBI has lodged the said FIR. Pursuant to the same, the CBI
conducted raids, search and seizure operations at all the
premises of the petitioner therein and her relatives and seized
all the bank accounts.
(d) Aggrieved by the filing of the FIR being RC No.
0062003A0019 of 2003, Ms. Mayawati-the petitioner therein and
Respondent No. 1 herein preferred Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 135
of 2008 before this Court. In the said petition, one Shri
Kamlesh Verma (the petitioner herein) also moved an application
for intervention being I.A. No. 8 of 2010.
(e) This Court, by order dated 06.07.2012, quashed the FIR
being No. 0062003A0019 of 2003 dated 05.10.2003 holding that the
order dated 18.09.2003 does not contain any specific direction
regarding lodging of FIR in the matter of disproportionate
assets case against Ms. Mayawati (the petitioner therein) and
the CBI exceeded its jurisdiction in lodging the same and also
allowed the application for intervention.
(f) Aggrieved by the order of quashing of the FIR being No.
0062003A0019 of 2003 dated 05.10.2003, Shri Kamlesh Verma-the
petitioner herein/the intervenor therein has filed the above
review petition.
(3.) Heard Mr. Shanti Bhushan, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Satish Chandra Mishra, learned senior counsel
for Respondent No. 1 herein and Mr. Mohan Parasaran, learned
Solicitor General for the CBI.
Discussion:;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.