38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, January 12, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Rafale Deal Documents Stolen From Defence Ministry: Centre To SC

By LawStreet News Network      06 March, 2019 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Rafale Deal Documents Stolen From Defence Ministry: Centre To SC

Attorney General K.K. Venugopal, appearing for the Centre told the Supreme Court today (March 6, 2019) that the documents related to Rafale aircraft deal have been stolen from the Defence Ministry.

A three-judge Bench comprising of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices S.K. Kaul and K.M. Joseph in an open court was hearing review petitions filed by former Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders Arun Shourie and Yashwant Sinha and lawyer Prashant Bhushan. The petitioners seeking a review of apex court verdict in the Rafale case passed on December 14, 2018, relied upon those documents.

The petitioners asserted that the Centre quite clearly misled the court as the court had relied upon false averments to come to the conclusion that the procedure for procurement of the 36 Rafale jets was duly complied with.

When Mr. Bhushan referred to an article published in The Hindu, AG Venugopal opposed it, saying that the articles were based on stolen documents and an investigation into the matter is on.

Mr. Venugopal said that the article published on February 8, 2019, was aimed at influencing the proceedings and that amounted to contempt of court.

While Mr. Venugopal was seeking dismissal of the review petitions and raising objections to Bhushans arguments based on the articles published in The Hindu, the Bench sought to know from the Centre as to what has it done since the article was first published.

To which, the AG apprised the court that an investigation into the matter was underway.

The AG also submitted before the court that the documents on the deal relied on by the petitioners were marked secret and classified, and therefore, are in violation of Official Secrets Act, 1923.

Mr. Bhushan argued in the court that critical facts on Rafale were suppressed when the petition for an FIR and investigation were filed.

He said that the top court would not have dismissed the plea for FIR and probe into Rafale deal had there not been suppression of facts.

At this point, the CJI said that hearing Mr. Bhushan did not mean that the top court was also taking on record the documents on the Rafale deal.

The Bench rose for the lunch break asking Mr. Venugopal to apprise it about the whole development related to the stealing of the documents and the investigation conducted by the Centre in the post-lunch session.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

wrong-bail-orders-alone-without-evidence-of-corruption-cannot-justify-removal-of-judicial-officer-sc
Trending Judiciary
Wrong Bail Orders Alone, Without Evidence of Corruption, Cannot Justify Removal of Judicial Officer: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that wrong bail orders alone cannot justify removal of a judicial officer without proof of corruption, misconduct, or extraneous considerations.

06 January, 2026 07:43 PM
divorced-muslim-woman-can-seek-maintenance-under-crpc-even-after-receiving-amount-under-muslim-women-protection-act-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Divorced Muslim Woman Can Seek Maintenance Under CrPC Even After Receiving Amount Under Muslim Women Protection Act: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court holds that a divorced Muslim woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even after receiving amounts under the 1986 Act.

06 January, 2026 08:19 PM
delhi-hc-full-bench-settles-bsf-seniority-dispute-rule-of-continuous-regular-appointment-prevails
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Full Bench Settles BSF Seniority Dispute; Rule of ‘Continuous Regular Appointment’ Prevails [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court Full Bench rules BSF seniority is based on date of continuous regular appointment, rejecting claims for antedated seniority due to delayed joining.

06 January, 2026 08:45 PM
borrowers-cannot-invoke-writ-jurisdiction-to-compel-banks-to-extend-one-time-settlement-benefits-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Borrowers Cannot Invoke Writ Jurisdiction to Compel Banks to Extend One-Time Settlement Benefits: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court holds borrowers cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to compel banks to grant One-Time Settlement benefits, as OTS is not a legal right.

07 January, 2026 09:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email