SC to hear all Vyapam scam related petitions on July 9 | india | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Dec 17, 2017-Sunday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

SC to hear all Vyapam scam related petitions on July 9

The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear all public interest litigations seeking a court-monitored Central Bureau of Investigation probe into the Vyapam scam that has rocked the Shivraj Chouhan-led government in Madhya Pradesh.

india Updated: Jul 08, 2015 03:16 IST
HT Correspondent

The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear all public interest litigations seeking a court-monitored Central Bureau of Investigation probe into the Vyapam scam that has rocked the Shivraj Chouhan-led government in Madhya Pradesh.

Senior advocate Vivek Tankha mentioned the matter on behalf of Congress leader Digvijaya Singh and three whistleblowers — Ashish Chaturvedi, Anand Rai and Prashant Pandey — before a bench headed by Chief Justice HL Dattu, who fixed July 9 to hear the cases.

The court told him that it would hear another petition related to the removal of the state governor for his alleged involvement in the scam on the same date.



Watch:The A to Z of the Vyapam scam



Aam Admi Party (AAP) leader Kumar Vishwas has also filed a petition before the SC asking it to take cognisance of the matter. His matter is likely to be heard along with the other petitions.

A group of lawyers from the MP high court have asked for the removal of governor Ram Naresh Yadav and the recording of his statement in the case.

Sanjay Shukla and four other advocates argued Yadav should not be granted immunity from criminal proceedings under Article 361.

According to the petition “no protection shall be granted to any person, be it the Governor of a State, who has committed an act which leads to criminal conduct, and it is necessary that such act comes to light, for which investigation is necessary.”

The three whistleblowers have claimed before SC to have received death threats and have narrated their version of the case. Their plea before the state HC for security was rejected, said an advocate involved in drafting the petition.