MS. MAYAWATI versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2012] 7 S.C.R. 33 · Decided: 06-07-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P. SATHASIVAM · Disposal: Case Allowed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2012] 7 S.C.R. 33 
MS. MAYAWATI 
V. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
(Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 135 of 2008) 
JULY 6, 2012 
[P. SATHASIVAM AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.] 
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - s. 13(2) rlw s. 13(1 )(e) 
A 
B 
- FIR registered under - Quashing of - Writ petition for -
Irregularities in Taj Heritage Corridor project under Taj C 
Trapezium Zone (TTZ) Area at Agra - Rs. 17 crores released 
for the project without proper sanction - Directions issued by 
Supreme Court vide order dated 18-9-2003 - CBI directed to 
conduct inquiry - FIR lodged by CBI against the writ petitioner 
uls. 13(2) rlw s. 13(1 )(e) of the Act on the basis that in the said D 
order dated 18-09-2003, there was a clear direction to register 
an FIR for investigating into the alleged disproportionate 
assets of the petitioner - Plea of petitioner (who was the State 
Chief Minister on the date of filing of the writ petition) that the 
FIR was beyond the scope of the directions passed by E 
Supreme Court in its order dated 18-9-2003 - Held: Directions 
issued in the order dated 18c9-2003 have to be read in the 
light of the previous orders dated 16-7-2003, 21-8-2003 and 
11-9-2003 as well as subsequent orders dated 25-10-2004 
and 7-8-2006 - Reading of all the orders clearly show the 
F 
direction to lodge FIR was issued only with respect to Taj 
Conidor matter, more particularly, irregularities therein - In fact, 
the direction was confined to find out as to who cleared the 
project of Taj Corridor and for what purpose it was cleared and 
whether there was any illegality or irregularity committed by G 
officers and other persons concerned in the State - Supreme 
Court did not issue any direction to the CBI to conduct a roving 
inquiry against the assets of the petitioner commencing from 
1995 to 2003 even though the Taj Heritage Corridor Project 
33 
H 
34 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 7 S.C.R. 
A was conceived only in July, 2002 and the amount of Rs.17 
crores was released in August/September, 2002 - Since order 
dated 18-9-2003 did not contain any specific direction 
regarding lodging of FIR in the matter of disproportionate 
assets case against the petitioner, CBI was not justified in 
B proceeding with the FIR -Impugned FIR was without 
jurisdiction and any investigation pursuant thereto was illegal 
and liable to be quashed, accordingly quashed. 
This Court, by order dated 16.07.2003 in I.A. No. 387 
C of 2003 in Writ Petition (C) No. 13381 of 1984 titled M.C. 
Mehta vs. Union of India & Ors. had directed the CBI to 
conduct an inquiry in regard to the alleged irregularities 
committed by the officers/persons in the Taj Heritage 
Corridor Project. By means of order dated 21.08.2003, this 
Court issued certain directions to the CBI to interrogate 
D and verify the assets of the persons concerned with 
regard to outflow of Rs. 17 crores which was alleged to 
have been released without proper sanction for the said 
Project. On 11.09.2003, a report was submitted by the CBI. 
This Court, in its further order dated 18.09.2003, on the 
E basis of the report dated 11.09.2003, granted further time 
to the CBI for verification of the assets of the officers/ 
persons involved. The CBI submitted a report on 
18.09.2003 before this Court which formed the basis of 
order dated 18.09.2003 wherein the CBI was directed to 
F conduct an inquiry with respect to the execution of the 
Taj Heritage Corridor Project under Taj Trapezium Zone 
(TTZ) Area at Agra. 
Pursuant thereto, an FIR was lodged on 05.10.2003 
G being RC No. 0062003A0018/2003 under Section 120-B 
read with Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and under 
Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention 
of Corruption Act, 1988 (the PC Act) against several 
persons including the petitioner. On the same date i.e. 
H 05.10.2003, the CBI registered another FIR being R.C. No. 
MAYAWATI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
35 
0062003A0019 under Section 13(2) read with Section 
A 
13(1 )(e) of the PC Act exclusively against the petitioner, 
on the basis that in the said order dated 18.09.2003 of 
this Court, there was a clear direction to register an FIR 
for investigating into the disproportionate assets of the 
Petitioner. 
.Subsequently the Petitioner filed the instant writ 
petition before this Court under Article 32 of the 
Constitution. On the date of filing of the writ petition, the 
petitioner was the Chief Minister of U.P. 
B 
c 
The question raised in the writ petition was whether 
FIR
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.