Mulayam assets case
- After Fali Nariman, former SC judge questions Lokpal selection process
- TRS wonât merge, Congress readies to walk alone in both Andhra and Bihar
- Bihar: Flanked by Paswans, Narendra Modi sells âN(Development)Aâ
- Nitin Gadkari's âproposalâ for Raj Thackeray: Donât put up candidates for LS polls
- CBI to look into DLF high-rise plan near Rashtrapati Bhavan
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 places like Lucknow and Etawah 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 of India.
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, 2007. It approached the 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. In its report, CBI is believed to have recommended a regular case be registered against Mulayam and the others.
In July 2008, as the political crisis over the nuclear deal appeared coming to a head, there were reports of "negotiations" between Mulayam and the UPA government. That month, Dimple wrote to PM Manmohan Singh, denying allegations against her. Singh forwarded the letter to CBI, which asked for legal opinion.
On November 21, 2008, the 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 and there is no reference in the judgment about Smt Malti Devi and Dimple Yadav holding any office of power or authority".
- Russia tightens grip in Crimea, West threatens ‘consequences’
- Heavy patrolling in Sector 23 after thief leaves daring note
- Difference of opinion between Patil and UT’s senior standing counsel led to his resignation
- Commissioner to look into shady land deals in 35 villages: High Court
- Class X maths exam easy for some, tough for others
- Panchkula MC approves budget of Rs 39 crore