A recent plea by advocate Ajay Agrawal calls for a swift review of the 2005 Delhi High Court decision in the Bofors case, underscoring a 16-year delay since filing and ongoing concerns in the defense sector.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: A new application has been submitted to the Supreme Court, urging for a prompt review of a petition that challenges the 2005 Delhi High Court ruling. This landmark verdict had previously dismissed all allegations, including those against the Hinduja brothers, in the controversial Rs 64 crore Bofors pay-off case, a matter that has remained politically sensitive over the years.
The application, lodged by advocate Ajay Agrawal, underscores the prolonged duration since the initial filing and the historical context of the case. Agrawal’s plea brings to light the extensive timeline of the legal battle:
“Around 16 years have passed of filing of this case by the applicant and 35 years have passed of the occurring of this scam. All the accused persons have died in between leaving Hinduja Brothers.”
The plea further emphasizes the broader implications of the delay in justice, stating-
“There have been recurrence of scams in the defence sector since the accused in this first-ever scam i.e., Bofors scam have not been punished. It is expedient in the interest of justice that the matter be heard at an early date.”
ALSO READ:Supreme Court’s Verdict on Child Custody: A Child is Not a Chattel
This move comes after the Supreme Court’s decision on November 2, 2018, which turned down the CBI’s request for condonation of the 13-year delay in appealing against the high court’s judgment. The apex court’s order from 2018 highlighted the dissatisfaction with the reasons provided for the delay:
“We are not convinced with the grounds furnished by the petitioner for the inordinate delay of 4,522 days in filing the present Special Leave Petitions.”
The 2005 judgment by the high court had absolved the three Hinduja brothers—S P Hinduja, G P Hinduja, and P P Hinduja—along with the Bofors company, from all charges. This verdict followed a 2004 decision that cleared former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi of involvement, while also instructing that charges of forgery under section 465 of the Indian Penal Code be framed against AB Bofors, a then Swedish arms manufacturer now part of the UK’s BAE Systems.
Section 465 of the Indian Penal Code –
If someone commits forgery, they can be sentenced to up to two years in prison, fined, or both.
The controversy traces back to the Rs 1,437-crore deal between India and AB Bofors signed on March 24, 1986, for the supply of 400 units of 155 mm Howitzer guns for the Indian Army. Allegations of corruption surfaced when Swedish Radio, on April 16, 1987, accused the company of bribing top Indian politicians and defense officials to secure the deal.
ALSO READ:Supreme Court’s Stance on Relationship Changes: Refuses To Quash Rape Case
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) initiated a formal inquiry on January 22, 1990, against several individuals including Martin Ardbo, then president of AB Bofors, and alleged middlemen Win Chadda and the Hinduja brothers, for purported crimes of criminal conspiracy, cheating, and forgery.
The legal proceedings saw the filing of the first charge sheet on October 22, 1999, against Chadda, Italian businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi, then defense secretary S K Bhatnagar, Ardbo, and the Bofors company. A subsequent charge sheet was presented against the Hinduja brothers on October 9, 2000.
In a notable turn of events, a special CBI court in Delhi discharged Quattrocchi from the case on March 4, 2011, citing the impracticality of continuing to spend significant amounts of public funds on extradition efforts, which had already amounted to Rs 250 crore.
