New Delhi: Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati on Monday told the Supreme Court that she will place before it the records from a debate in Parliament to counter the allegations of CBI that there was ample evidence to prosecute her in a disproportionate assets case.
The BSP supremo, who alleged the case lodged against
her in 2003 was politically motivated, said certain documents
which forms part of Parliament record during the debate on
confidence motion in July last have to be procured to refute
the contentions of the investigating agency.
"We have to write to Parliament to get those papers
which are part of record of the debate," Additional Advocate
General of Uttar Pradesh Shail Kumar Dwivedi and Mayawati`s
close aid and senior advocate S C Mishra told a Bench headed
by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan.
The advocates were responding to the Bench as to why
they need two months to respond to the affidavit of CBI which
has said that the chargesheet in the case was ready for filing
before a competent court.
Dwivedi said an affidavit has also to be filed by the
then BSP MP in Lok Sabha Brajesh Pathak who participated
in the debate in Parliament and made a reference to meeting
with a person claiming to be CBI official.
The counsel later claimed to reporters that Pathak,
now a Rajya Sabha MP, was handed over some papers, which was
part of record of the agency`s investigation into the
disproportionate assets case, by a person claiming to be a CBI
official.
He further claimed those documents show that the case
was not made out against the Chief Minister and the MP was
promised to be obliged if the government was saved.
CBI, in its fresh affidavit filed last week, said
"the competent authority has already taken a decision to file
the final report under section 173 of the criminal procedure
code in the designated trial court."
Dwivedi had on Friday last told the Bench that a
letter has been circulated for posting the matter after eight
weeks as the Chief Minister would file a counter to the
affidavit.
CBI counsel had said there has not been any changes in
its stand to what the apex court was informed on January 12
when it had said there was enough evidence to prosecute
Mayawati in the case.
CBI had pointed out that her declared assets of
Rs.one crore in 2003 went up to Rs.50 crore in 2007 and said
there was "ample evidence" to show she had amassed wealth
disproportionate to her known sources of income.
Mayawati has claimed that she had received the money
through donations from party workers which included meagre
sums of Rs.five and Rs.ten which they contributed on her
birthday.
The UP CM filed a petition in May, 2008, seeking
quashing of the criminal proceedings against her in the case
alleging it was registered due to "political reasons".
The investigating agency had in July last responded to
the apex court notice saying there was sufficient evidence to
show that Mayawati amassed wealth disproportionate to her
known sources of income.
The CBI, which had lodged a DA case against the BSP
chief in 2003, alleged the assets shown by her in Akbarpur
parliamentary constituency were worth over Rs one crore
whereas the assets increased to over Rs 50 crore in her
declaration papers submitted during the 2007 assembly polls.
The agency had said the she had been questioned about
the wealth over three years and Mayawati had claimed it came
from donations of party workers.
However, the agency contended that Mayawati`s
reasoning was not plausible and that it was likely to file a
chargesheet against her soon.
The agency refuted Mayawati`s allegation that the UPA
government was using the probe to serve its political
interests.
CBI had registered the FIR against Mayawati on
October 5, 2003 after the apex court had ordered the agency to
investigate the Rs 175 crore Taj Heritage Corridor scam.
When the matter had come for hearing earlier, the
Centre had said the two reports placed before the apex court
by CBI on September 18, 2003 contained the issue relating
to the assets.
It had said Mayawati was participating in the inquiry
since 2005 which could have been concluded by 2006 but has
been delayed as the Chief Minister was making several
representations -- even to the Prime Minister -- as she was
"scared" of the investigation`s outcome.
Bureau Report
