SC clears Mayawati's trial in Taj Corridor Case

New Delhi, Nov 27: The Supreme Court today cleared the decks for the trial of former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister and Bahujan Samaj Party president Mayawati in the Rs 175 crore Taj Corridor case.

A bench comprising Justices S B Sinha and S H Kapadia, while rejecting a status report filed by the CBI on December 31, 2004 directed that only that report of the investigating agency which says that there is sufficient material against Ms Mayawati to put her to trial in the case, shall be forwarded to the special judge for consideration.

The apex court made it clear that the report of the Attorney General of India Milon K Banerjee giving a clean chit to Ms Mayawati and the report of Chief Vigilance Commissioner shall not be forwarded to the special court.

The court passed severe strictures against the functioning of the administration and investigating agencies observing ''efficacy and efficiency of investigation has been coming under challenge for failure of the investigative agencies to conduct proper and honest investigation and if this state of affairs continues, the rule of law will be reduced to a rope of sand.'' Justice Kapadia, reading out from the operative portion of an unanimous judgement, however, made it clear that this court was making no observations on the merits of the case and the material shall be examined by the special judge on merit.

The court rejected the contention of the CBI Director that in view of the difference of opinion among CBI officers, he was jusstified in seeking the opinion of the Attorney General.

Reading out from the CBI Manual, the court said that after considering law especially the judgement in the Saharia case, it is convinced that the only opinion to be placed for consideration before the trial court for consideration should be that of incharge of police station concerned and none other and in the CBI hierarchy, SP is incharge of investigation.

The Court also made it clear that there was no difference of opinion among the officers of CBI which include the Investigation Officers, SP, DIG, IG and Additional Director General. It was only the Director of Prosecution, CBI, who differed in his opinion.

The court also said that public prosecutor is appointed only for the conduct of trial and cannot interfere in the investigation of a case.

The court made it clear that, at present, it is not concerned with the merits of the case and is looking whether the administrative authority and the investigating agency have conducted the investigation in proper and honest manner and whether there is sufficient material against the accused to put her on trial in the opinion of the investigating officer.

It may be noted here that senior officers including the then Principal Secretary, Environment Secretary and the then Uttar Pradesh Environment Minister are also facing trial in the case.

Ms Mayawati is facing allegations of acquiring assets disproportionate to her known sources of income by misusing her status as Chief Minister.

She has allegedly acquired property of over 100 crore in Noida, Delhi and other parts of the country.

The CBI shall now place the entire material before the special judge, except the opinion of the AG and CVC, for deciding whether the material is sufficient to try Ms Mayawati under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

UNI