‘Took 22 pages, yet no complete regret’: SC on Rahul Gandhi’s Rafale affidavit
Rahul Gandhi to file fresh affidavit in Rafale contempt case after SC tells him to clearly spell out his pointUpdated: Apr 30, 2019 17:53 IST
Hindustan Times, New Delhi
Congress president Rahul Gandhi on Tuesday offered to file a fresh affidavit in the Rafale contempt case after the Supreme Court made it clear that the judges weren’t convinced with his last affidavit that ran into 22 pages but did not spell out that he regretted his statement.
“You take 22 pages to express regret… but where is the complete regret,” Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi told the Congress president’s lawyer Abhishek Singhvi on Tuesday. Singhvi attempted to convince the judges that Rahul Gandhi had clearly regretted the mistake.
But when he didn’t make much headway, the senior lawyer offered to file a fresh affidavit.
This would be Rahul Gandhi’s third affidavit in the contempt case filed against him by BJP lawmaker Meenakshi Lekhi for incorrectly attributing his political slogan, chowkidar chor hai, to the judges.
In his previous similarly-worded affidavits, Rahul Gandhi had told the court that his remarks were not meant to obstruct administration of justice or scandalise the court in any manner. Gandhi also apologised for ascribing comments to the court, which he said, happened due to “juxtaposing” in a “rhetorical flourish in the heat of political campaigning”.
The Congress leader had also said he had the “highest esteem” for the judiciary and urged the top court to dismiss Lekhi’s contempt petition and impose a fine on her for dragging the court into a political controversy.
Lekhi had asked the court to initiate criminal contempt action against Gandhi for having twisted top court’s April 10 judgment to claim that the court declared Prime Minister guilty of corrupt practices in purchase of 36 Rafale aircrafts.
In its April 10 ruling, the top court had allowed three sets of documents to be used, rejecting the government’s argument that the documents should not be considered during the hearing because these were sensitive in nature and had been obtained through “unauthorised photocopying and leakage”.
First Published: Apr 30, 2019 15:28 IST