CBI rushes to SC to become party in case against Rahul

NEW DELHI: In an unusual move, the Central Bureau of Investigation has rushed to the Supreme Court wanting to be a party in an appeal filed by Kishore Samrite against whom a probe was ordered by the Allahabad high court for levelling false charges against Congress general secretary and MP Rahul Gandhi.

The HC had asked for the CBI probe against Samrite on March 7. The CBI had lodged a case under Indian Penal Code Sections — 120b (criminal conspiracy), 181 (false statement on oath), 211 (false charges to cause injury ) and 499-500 (defamation). The HC had imposed a fine of Rs 50 lakh on Samrite.

On appeal, the Supreme Court had on April 6 entertained Samrite’s appeal and issued notice to the UP government , Rahul Gandhi and other respondents in Samrite’s petition and also stayed the HC order. It had asked the respondents to file reply within eight weeks.

Given the sensitivity of the case, the CBI through counsel A K Sharma moved an application on Wednesday seeking to be made a party in the appeal and said its investigations into the case had also got stayed because of the SC’s order.

The CBI said a writ petition was filed in the high court by one Sukanya Devi and two others through Samrite
accusing Rahul Gandhi of illegally detaining some people. Sukanya Devi filed another petition through Gajendra Pal Singh seeking similar relief.

The CBI said the HC had tagged the two petitions. On March 7, the people alleged to have been detained by Rahul Gandhi appeared before the HC and denied any wrongdoing by the MP.

The HC in its March 7 order said: “We also direct the CBI director to register a case against Kishore Samrite and all other people who are found involved in the plot, if any, hatched in order to defame Shri Rahul Gandhi , Member of Parliament from Amethi.”

“We also appreciate Gajendra Pal Singh for approaching this court in order to save the reputation of Shri Rahul Gandhi and the family of alleged detenues at the hands of vested interests responsible for filing the earlier petition,” the HC had said.