Allahabad HC asks CBI, ED to probe DA complaint against Rahul Gandhi over ‘spending beyond income’

The petitioner has alleged accumulation of disproportionate assets by Gandhi and sought direction of an inquiry into the matter.

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has directed the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Enforcement Directorate to examine the allegations of disproportionate assets against former Congress president and Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi..

A division bench comprising Justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Zafeer Ahmed passed the order on a petition by BJP worker from Karnataka Shishir Vignesh.

Though the matter was heard by the court in its chambers on Tuesday, the order was uploaded on the website of the court on Thursday. The court fixed July 20 for further hearing of the matter.

The Court allowed Vignesh’s request for impleadment of the DoPT, ministry of corporate affairs.

The CBI, through its counsel, informed the Court that a complaint had been received and that it would file a response in the matter within eight weeks.

The counsel for the ED also informed that it had also received complaint of the petitioner and might verify the allegations, thereafter the progress thereof may be apprised to the Court.

‘’It is expected that if the complaint of the petitioner has been received, the allegations of the complaints may be verified as per law. It is needless to say that the CBI or ED may take appropriate steps which are permissible under the law,’’ the court said.

The Central Government Counsel informed court that he had received some oral instructions from respondent the Director, Serious Fraud Investigation Office, Government of India and that some time may be given to file counter affidavit regarding contents of writ petition.

The court said that the petitioner had placed reliance on some case laws and judgments to submit with vehemence that he may pray for those reliefs by filing writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

‘’The aforesaid submission of the petitioner may be tested after receiving the counter affidavits of the respective parties and the rejoinder affidavits thereof,’’ it added.

The petitioner has cited Rahul's foreign trips to claim that he had spent money on them which was more than his known sources of income.