Akhilesh, Mulayam Yadav disproportionate assets case: SC sends notice to CBI, seeks reply in two weekshttps://indianexpress.com/article/india/akhilesh-mulayam-yadav-assets-case-supreme-court-sends-notice-cbi-seeks-reply-5641329/

Akhilesh, Mulayam Yadav disproportionate assets case: SC sends notice to CBI, seeks reply in two weeks

A petition filed by advocate Vishwanath Chaturvedi sought an investigation against Mulayam Singh Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav, Mulayam's other son Prateek, and his daughter-in-law Dimple. Supreme Court, in 2007, asked the CBI to conduct a preliminary enquiry.

Akhilesh, Mulayam Yadav assets case: SC sends notice to CBI, seeks reply in two weeks
The case pertains to disproportionate assets worth over Rs 100 crore which were allegedly accumulated by the father-son duo between 1999 and 2005, part of it during Mulayam Singh Yadav’s tenure between 2003-2007. (file/Express Photo by Renuka Puri)

The Supreme Court Monday sent a notice to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with a plea pertaining to allegations of disproportionate assets against Samajwadi Party leaders and former chief ministers of Uttar Pradesh Mulayam Singh Yadav and Akhilesh Yadav.

A bench comprising of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta asked the CBI to give its reply within two weeks. The apex court demanded to know what happened to the status report filed in 2007 in the matter.

The case pertains to disproportionate assets worth over Rs 100 crore which were allegedly accumulated by the father-son duo between 1999 and 2005, part of it during Mulayam Singh Yadav’s tenure between 2003-2007.

Read | Akhilesh Yadav to contest from Azamgarh, Azam Khan from Rampur Lok Sabha seat

Advertising

A petition filed by advocate Vishwanath Chaturvedi sought an investigation against Mulayam Singh Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav, Mulayam’s other son Prateek, and his daughter-in-law Dimple. The Supreme Court, in 2007, asked the CBI to conduct a preliminary enquiry into the case.

The CBI told the top court that it wanted “registration of a regular case under the Prevention of Corruption Act.” It said “prima facie possession of assets disproportionate to known source of income” was Rs 2.63 crore. At this time, Samajwadi Party was out of power in the state.

The Yadavs, meanwhile, sought a stay on the proceedings several times but the court refused. In 2012, the court dropped the case against Dimple as she was not holding any public office when the case was filed, but asked the CBI to file its status report in the matter before the it and not the government.

For latest coverage on Haryana and Maharashtra Elections, log on to IndianExpress.com. We bring you the fastest assembly election 2019 updates from each constituency in both the states.