Decoding Mulayam Singh Yadav assets case
- Haji Ali dargah will have to open doors for women after Bombay HC ruling
- My vision for India is rapid transformation, not gradual evolution: PM Modi
- Panel works on alternative to pellets: Balls of pepper, capsicum gas
- Scorpene leak: Firms to be blacklisted only in cases of clear criminality, says Parrikar
- Sheena Bora murder: Taped conversations emerging on media submitted in court, says CBI
What are the allegations?
Rae Bareli advocate Vishvanath Chaturvedi filed a PIL in the Supreme Court in November 2005, seeking a CBI inquiry into the assets of Mulayam Singh Yadav, sons Akhilesh and Prateek, and daughter-in-law Dimple. The petitioner alleged the family had acquired properties in Lucknow, Etawah, etc, worth over Rs 100 crore, which were disproportionate to their known sources of income.
What happened in the SC?
In June 2006, the SC directed Mulayam, Akhilesh, Prateek and Dimple to file before it their income-tax returns of the preceding four years. On March 1, 2007, it asked CBI to conduct a preliminary enquiry into the allegations and submit a report to the Government.
What did Mulayam do?
On March 16, 2007, Mulayam and the others filed petitions against the order, alleging that Chaturvedi's PIL was sponsored by the Congress. Justice A R Lakshmanan declined to hear the case; Justice Altamas Kabir, now Chief Justice of India, heard the case in open court.
What did CBI do?
CBI registered a PE on March 5, 2007, and concluded it on October 26 that year. It approached court the next month, saying it would like to submit its report to the court rather than the government, and handed over a sealed envelope to court. The CBI report is believed to have recommended a regular case be registered against Mulayam and the others. In July 2008, as the crisis over the Nuclear deal was coming to a head, there were reports of "negotiations" between Mulayam and the UPA. That month, Dimple wrote to the PM, denying allegations against her. The PM forwarded the letter to CBI, which asked for legal opinion.
On November 21, 2008, then Solicitor General G E Vahanvati opined that the assets of Dimple and Malti Devi, Mulayam's late first wife, could not be clubbed with those of Mulayam, because they "held no public office".
- Pakistan army has a battle to win: The corruption within
- Anger of Irom Sharmila’s supporters should not be dismissed as selfishness or cynicism
- You keep the cow’s tail: A post card from Una, Gujarat, August 15
- History shows why Balochistan is not an internal matter of Pakistan
- The use of technology will be key to making GST a success
- Sedition law cannot be used against honest views, expressed peacefully