JANTA DAL ETC. ETC. versus H.S. CHOWDHARY AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Citation: [1992] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 226 · Decided: 28-08-1992 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN · Disposal: Disposed off
cites 7 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
JANTA DAL ETC. ETC. 
v. 
H.S. CHOWDHARY AND ORS. ETC. ETC. 
AUGUST 28, 1992 
B 
[S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN AND K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY, JJ.) 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Sections 397, 401, 482--Revisional 
and inherent powers of High Court-Scope and ambit of-Single Judge of 
High Court-Assumption of suo motu jurisdiction to quash FIR in Bofors 
C case-Legality of 
Constitution of India, 1950: Article 32-l'IL-Definition, concept and 
purpose of-''Public interest", "litigation''-Construction-f'arameters for enter-
taining PIL-Whether possible to lay down-Locus standi of a pany-lmpor-
tance of-Locus standi in private action and PIL-Difference of-Petitions.in 
D the garo of PIL by persons interested-Maintainability of 
Words and Phrases: "Public interest'~ "litigation
1
~ 
11Public interest litiga-
tion-Meaning of 
Public Interest Litigation-Definition, concept and purpose of-
E Parameters for entertaining PIL-Whether possible to lay down-f'etitions in 
the gariJ of PIL by persons interested-Maintainability of 
F 
G 
Locus Standi-Significance in PIL and private action-f'etitions in the 
garo of PIL by persons interested-Maintainability of 
Swedish Radio on 16.4.1987 broadcasted that to win the contact 
awarded on 24.3.1986 by the Government of India, Bofors of Sweden paid 
bribes to senior Indian Politicians and Defence officials. On 17 .4.1987 
some leading newspapers of India gave prominent coverage to the broad-
cast. 
On 17.4.1987 the Swedish Radio claimed in its broadcast that it bad 
documentary proof of the pay offs in four Instalments to Indian accounts 
in Swiss Banks and It also checked with the bankers of Bofors. 
Bofors denied paying any kickbacks to Indian politicians or omclals 
H in its statement Issued on 17 .4:1987. 
226 
JANTA DAL v. HS. CHOWDHARY 
227 
On 17.4.1987 the Government of India also issued a statement A 
denying the allegations contained in the news items based on the Swedish 
Radio and Television broadcast, as false, baseless and mischievous; 
The Minister of Defence on 2().4.1987 on the subject stated in the Lok 
Sabha suo motu that the Bofors did not employ any Representative Agent 
in India for the project. However, they used the services of a local firm B 
only for administrative services, e.g. hotel bookings, transportation, for· 
warding of letters, telexes etc. The Minister further stated that if any 
evidence was produced involving violation of the law, thorough investiga· 
lion would be taken and guilty would be punished. On 31.4.1987 he also 
made similar statement in the Rajya Sabha. 
C 
On 20.4.1987, the than Prime Minister intervening in the debates in 
the Lok Sabha assured the Members that if any evidence relating to the 
involvement of middlemen, of pay-offs, bribes or commissions were shown, 
then strong action would be taken and nobody would be allowed to go free. 
Several Members of the Parliament demanded a probe with full 
details by a Parliamentary Committee. 
D 
On 4.6.1987, the Swedish Embassy in India, forwarded a copy of a 
part of the Report of the Swedish National Audit Bureau's (SNAB) dated E 
1.6.1987. The rest of the Report was withheld by the Swedish Government 
on the bank secrecy requirements. The Report did not disclose the names 
of the recipients of kickbacks. 
The tb~n Prime Minister discussed the report with the leaders of the 
opposition parties on 11.6.1987. When the Government of India requested F 
the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, to 
set up on their own Join Parliamentary Committee (JPC), they declined. 
The then Prime Minister in his meeting with the leader of the opposition 
in Parliament on 17.6.1987 Indicated that in the Monsoon Session of Lok 
Sabha. The Government would move for the motion for the appointment 
ofaJPC to probe Into the Bofors deal. On29.7.1987, the motion was moved G 
by the then Defence Minister. While moving the motion on 3.8.1987, be 
stated that from the report of SNAB two fai ·' emerged, viz (I) that sizable 
payments were made In 1986; and (II) that the particulars of !he recipients 
of the amounts paid by Bofors were not disclosed. In justifica.tion of the 
constitution of JPC, the Defence Minister stated that the Committee was H 
"' 
228 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1992] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A set up to get at the truth. 
B 
The JPC was constituted consisting of 20 elected members from Lok 
Sabha and 10 from Rajya Sabha. Its Chairman was appointed on 
28.8.1988. In the JPC five members were elec
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.