Taj Corridor: SC wont review quashing of FIR against Maya

The Bench clarified that its previous directives were confined to the inquiry into the alleged irregularities in the Taj Heritage Corridor Project and that it did not deal with any other aspect of the issue.

It is made clear that we have not gone into any other aspect relating to the claim of the CBI,intervener or the stand of the writ petitioner except the directions relating to Taj Heritage Corridor Project,which was the only lis (legal issue) before us…In such circumstances and in the light of enormous decisions,we find that there is no material within the parameters of review jurisdiction to go into the earlier order, held the Bench.

The SC order comes as a major relief for Mayawati,for allowing the review petition,beyond a simple clarification,could mean reviving the disproportionate assets case lodged by the CBI on October 5,2003. The CBI in Lucknow had lodged the case,relying on certain court directions to it for interrogating and verifying the assets of suspects over the outflow of Rs 17 crore,alleged to had been released by the state government without proper sanction for the project. Acting on this FIR,the CBI had then conducted raids at all the premises of Mayawati and her relatives and seized various bank accounts.

Challenging the FIR,Mayawati moved the court. Kamlesh Verma,a UP resident,also intervened in the matter and argued against her petition. In July 2012,the court allowed Mayawatis plea,holding that its order did not contain any specific direction regarding lodging of FIR in the matter of disproportionate assets case against her. The SC also pulled up the CBI for exceeding its jurisdiction in lodging the FIR. Aggrieved,Verma sought a review of this order. Appearing for him,senior advocate Shanti Bhushan argued that it was in the larger interest of justice that CBI be allowed to proceed further even if there was any invalidity of investigation and breach of mandatory provisions.

The Bench,however,clarified that anything beyond the Taj Corridor matter was not the subject matter of reference before the court and that reiteration of the arguments,already urged in the previous proceedings,was also not permissible under a review jurisdiction.