CBI pushes for perjury case against Prashant Bhushan

CBI pushes for perjury case against Prashant Bhushan

CBI pushes for perjury case against Prashant Bhushan

CBI today moved an application before Supreme Court for slapping a perjury case against lawyer Prashant Bhushan and the petitioner represented by him for making "mischievous" statement to "deliberately and intentionally" mislead the apex court.

In his application before the Supreme Court, CBI Director Ranjit Sinha said petitioner Kamal Kant Jaswal, Director of NGO 'Common Cause', and his lawyer Bhushan, had claimed before the Supreme Court that they had received information from "trustworthy and reliable sources" that appraisal report by Income Tax department about meat exporter Moin Qureshi covered in "some detail" his "dealings" with the CBI chief.

Jaswal, who is a former IAS officer of Uttar Pradesh cadre, had moved an application through his counsel asking directions to the Centre for submitting Qureshi's appraisal report.

The content of the application is "clearly mischievous and is based upon untrue facts in which mis-statements have been deliberately made so as to obtain favourable orders from this Hon'ble court", the CBI Director said in his plea.

Sinha said on October 17, 2014, the matter was heard by a three-judge bench headed by Justice M B Lokur wherein Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, appearing on behalf of the Union of India, submitted the appraisal report of the Income Tax Department in respect of Qureshi in a sealed cover.

Rohatgi had submitted that "there was nothing against the present Director, CBI" in the Income Tax Department report.

"All these false statements as stated above have been deliberately and intentionally made by the deponent and the counsel for the petitioner during the course of hearing" on October 17 and 19 "to cause a circumstance to exist with the objective of misleading this Hon'ble Court".

Sinha said in view of the facts stated by him, Jaswal and Bhushan "are punishable under various sections of the IPC including Section 193 (punishment for false evidence)."

When contacted, Bhushan said, "this is a desperate attempt by the Director to divert attention from very serious indictment by the Special Public Prosecutor".