India News

Delhi HC dismisses Swamy’s ‘political interest litigation’ in Sunanda Pushkar’s death case

Published

9 years ago

October 26, 2017

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Court witnessed heated arguments between Swamy and Justices S Muralidhar and IS Mehta who told him to be extremely circumspect in sharing petitions with media

The Delhi High Court, on Thursday, dismissed the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by BJP MP Subramanian Swamy seeking a court-monitored SIT investigation into the mysterious death of Sunanda Pushkar, wife of Congress MP Shashi Tharoor.

Questioning the locus standi of Swamy in the case and strongly chastising him for the allegations he made against Shashi Tharoor and the Delhi Police, the Division Bench of Justices S Muralidhar and IS Mehta also asked the BJP MP and his co-petitioner Ishkaran Bhandari to “be extremely circumspect in placing such a petition in the public domain even before it is properly considered by the Court”.

The judges were peeved at the fact that Swamy had reportedly made his entire petition public, through his social media accounts and the media a day before it was first heard by the court on July 12, 2017.

Through the proceedings of the case on Thursday, Swamy and the Bench entered into heated arguments with the former often attempting to emphasise on his understanding on the law and his social profile – that of a former law minister of India. The Bench was clearly not impressed with Swamy’s arguments and during verbal observations – and later in the written order too – said that his petition “is perhaps a textbook example of a ‘political interest litigation’ dressed up as a PIL”.

At one point during the arguments, Subramanian Swamy told the judges: “This is not my first PIL. I have appeared before many courts. I have filed several petitions in the past. Many of them are reported judgments and I have been successful in most of them. I have also been the Law Minister of the country.”

While the court kept insisting that it wanted to hear the case on the basis of facts and merits and sought Swamy to furnish evidence to support his claims of the Delhi police botching up the investigation into Pushkar’s mysterious death at the behest of Tharoor, who was a union minister at the time of his wife’s demise, the BJP leader failed to present any document to support his allegations.

In its verdict, the court noted: “Nothing has been placed on record (by Swamy) to probablise, let alone substantiate, the vague and sweeping allegations made in the petition. Dr. Swamy was asked whether he had any basis for alleging that the investigation was “botched” by the Delhi Police at the “behest of rich and influential”. He was also specifically asked if, indeed, he had any information in his possession as to who these persons are. In response, Dr. Swamy stated that he would file a further affidavit to substantiate the above as well as other sweeping allegations referred to hereinbefore (sic).”

The Bench went on to say in its order that: “The failure by Dr. Swamy to disclose the full facts and information in his possession, assuming that his assertion in this regard is right, is a fatal lapse. It is contrary to the assertion made by him in the affidavit.”

The court then came down heavily on Swamy, who it said “likes to be thought of as a veteran PIL petitioner”.

Terming his petition as a “textbook example of a political interest litigation”, the Bench said: “The Court should be careful in not letting the judicial process be abused by political personae for their own purposes… That is not to say that no political person can file a PIL. It is only that, in such instances, particularly where the principal allegations are against political opponents, the Court should be cautious in proceeding in the matter.”

In an effort to ensure that petitioners in future do not file PILs like the one filed by Swamy in the Sunanda Pushkar death case, the Bench ordered: “hereafter every writ petition (which includes a PIL petition) filed in the Registry (and not obviously a letter or post card) should be supported by an affidavit which, apart from complying with the legal requirements in terms of the governing Rules of the High Court, should clearly state which part of the averments (with reference to para numbers or parts thereof) made (including those in the synopsis and list of dates and not just the petition itself) is true to the Petitioner’s personal knowledge derived from records or based on some other source and what part is based on legal advice which the petitioner believes to be true.”

While the sternly worded order of the court left Swamy with little to say in the courtroom, the BJP leader – with his reputation for making outlandish claims on a variety of issues – took to Twitter later in the day to rant against the setback her received from the Delhi High Court and also to take a dig at his detractors.[/vc_column_text][vc_raw_html]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[/vc_raw_html][vc_raw_html]JTNDYmxvY2txdW90ZSUyMGNsYXNzJTNEJTIydHdpdHRlci10d2VldCUyMiUyMGRhdGEtbGFuZyUzRCUyMmVuJTIyJTNFJTNDcCUyMGxhbmclM0QlMjJlbiUyMiUyMGRpciUzRCUyMmx0ciUyMiUzRUFsbCUyMER1YmFpJTIwZG9uJTI2JTIzMzklM0JzJTIwc3VwcG9ydGVycyUyMGFuZCUyMG9uJTIwaGlzJTIwb24lMjBwYXlyb2xsJTIwYXJlJTIwY2VsZWJyYXRpbmclMjBIQyUyMGRpc21pc3NhbCUyMG9mJTIwbXklMjBQSUwuJTIwV2h5JTNGJTIwV2h5JTIwdGhlJTIwc2lnaCUyMG9mJTIwcmVsaWVmJTNGJTNDJTJGcCUzRSUyNm1kYXNoJTNCJTIwU3VicmFtYW5pYW4lMjBTd2FteSUyMCUyOCU0MFN3YW15MzklMjklMjAlM0NhJTIwaHJlZiUzRCUyMmh0dHBzJTNBJTJGJTJGdHdpdHRlci5jb20lMkZTd2FteTM5JTJGc3RhdHVzJTJGOTIzNDg5NzY1ODM5NjgzNTg0JTNGcmVmX3NyYyUzRHR3c3JjJTI1NUV0ZnclMjIlM0VPY3RvYmVyJTIwMjYlMkMlMjAyMDE3JTNDJTJGYSUzRSUzQyUyRmJsb2NrcXVvdGUlM0UlMEElM0NzY3JpcHQlMjBhc3luYyUyMHNyYyUzRCUyMmh0dHBzJTNBJTJGJTJGcGxhdGZvcm0udHdpdHRlci5jb20lMkZ3aWRnZXRzLmpzJTIyJTIwY2hhcnNldCUzRCUyMnV0Zi04JTIyJTNFJTNDJTJGc2NyaXB0JTNF[/vc_raw_html][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Related Topics:Subamanian Swamy Sunanda Pushkar Supreme Court

Up Next

Kerala: Two more ISIS suspects arrested, ‘main recruiter’ among them

Don't Miss

Swiss couple attacked in Fatehpur Sikri, Sushma Swaraj seeks report

India News

Four militants killed as rival Naga groups clash in Manipur village

Four militants were killed in a gunfight between suspected rival Naga groups at Taodaijang village in Manipur’s Noney district on Wednesday.

Published

2 hours ago

November 4, 2026

APNLive Desk

At least four militants were killed in a gunfight between suspected rival Naga militant groups in Manipur’s Noney district on Wednesday, November 4.

The exchange of fire took place at Taodaijang village in the Khoupum area of the Naga-majority district. According to officials, the cadres involved were suspected to belong to rival Naga militant outfits, including the Zeliangrong United Front-Jenchui (ZUF-J) and the Zeliangrong United Front-Kamson (ZUF-K).

Initial reports indicated that the gunfight continued for several hours, leaving three cadres of ZUF-J and one cadre of ZUF-K dead.

The bodies of the deceased militants were subsequently recovered by local residents.

Residents appeal to armed groups to stop firing

Following the gunfight, local residents, including women, reached the spot in an attempt to prevent further violence between the rival groups.

They also used a public address system to appeal to the armed cadres to stop firing and prevent the situation from escalating further.

Further details about the circumstances surrounding the clash were awaited.

Manipur government reviews security situation

In a separate development, Manipur Chief Minister Yumnam Khemchand Singh directed senior security officials to identify active armed groups suspected of involvement in recent incidents of violence in the state.

The directive excluded groups engaged in peace talks with the state government.

The Chief Minister issued the instructions during a review meeting on the state’s law and order situation on Tuesday night.

He also asked security agencies, including the Army and central paramilitary forces, to submit a detailed report on the involvement of the suspected groups.

The Chief Minister said the state Cabinet could consider declaring such groups unlawful if their involvement in violence against innocent civilians was established.

He also emphasised that necessary action would be initiated against groups continuing to perpetrate violence against civilians.

India News

Agnipath scheme gets 2-year extension for Agniveers, tenure may rise to 6 years

The Centre has introduced a two-year extension for the remaining 75% of Agniveers under the Agnipath scheme, creating another opportunity for them to seek enrolment in the regular armed forces.

Published

5 hours ago

November 4, 2026

APNLive Desk

The Centre has introduced a significant change to the Agnipath recruitment scheme, offering a two-year extension to Agniveers who were earlier expected to leave the armed forces after completing their initial four-year service.

Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General NS Raja Subramani announced the decision on Wednesday following a Union Cabinet meeting. Under the revised arrangement, the 75% of Agniveers who were not initially selected for absorption into the regular armed forces will be offered an additional two-year engagement period.

The development creates another opportunity for these personnel to continue serving in the armed forces beyond their original four-year tenure.

What changes under the revised Agnipath scheme?

Under the original Agnipath framework, Agniveers were recruited for a four-year service period, including training. At the end of this tenure, up to 25% of each batch could be selected for permanent enrolment into the regular armed forces, while the remaining 75% were expected to return to civilian life.

The revised arrangement introduces an additional two-year engagement for the latter group. This means their potential service period could increase from four to six years.

The extension also creates another opportunity for Agniveers to seek enrolment into the regular armed forces after completing the additional two years.

What happens after the additional two years?

According to General NS Raja Subramani, Agniveers completing the extended engagement period and willing to continue serving will be considered for enrolment in the regular armed forces.

Their selection will be based on objective criteria.

This creates an additional pathway for those who are not absorbed into the regular forces after their initial four-year tenure. However, the revised arrangement does not mean that every Agniveer will automatically receive permanent enrolment.

Why has the decision been taken now?

The announcement comes as the first batch of Agniveers recruited under the scheme approaches the completion of its initial four-year service period.

The Agnipath scheme was introduced on June 14, 2022, to recruit personnel into the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force for a fixed four-year engagement.

General Raja Subramani said the scheme had been undergoing periodic reviews, with the performance of Agniveers being continuously evaluated. He also indicated that feedback on their performance had been very positive.

The latest Cabinet decision creates an additional route for retaining personnel beyond the initial engagement period.

What was the original Agnipath arrangement?

Under the original framework, the armed forces could retain up to 25% of Agniveers in the regular cadre after their four-year service period, subject to selection.

The remaining 75% were to complete their engagement and transition to civilian life.

With the latest revision, this group will receive an additional two-year engagement opportunity before being considered for enrolment into the regular armed forces under the prescribed selection criteria.

The change therefore modifies the earlier arrangement by providing an additional opportunity for Agniveers to continue their military careers.

India News

Hardeep Singh Puri set to win Rajya Sabha bypoll unopposed

Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri is set to be elected unopposed to the Rajya Sabha from Madhya Pradesh after the returning officer rejected the nomination papers of two independent candidates.

Published

10 hours ago

November 4, 2026

APNLive Desk

Union Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri is set to enter the Rajya Sabha unopposed from Madhya Pradesh after the nomination papers of two independent candidates were rejected during scrutiny on Tuesday.

The two candidates whose nominations were rejected were Kante Sayanna and Rajkumar Lohani, the latter being backed by the Congress. Their rejection leaves Puri as the only candidate in the contest for the vacant Rajya Sabha seat.

According to an official, the result will be announced on November 5, which is also the last date for withdrawal of nominations.

The Returning Officer, Umesh Sharma, examined the nomination papers on the last day of scrutiny and rejected the two independent candidates’ applications.

Objections raised against Hardeep Puri’s nomination

The nomination papers submitted by Puri also faced objections from the two independent candidates and Congress leader Hemant Katare.

They questioned the validity and completeness of Puri’s affidavit filed in Form 26, raising concerns over whether the mandatory details had been properly furnished.

However, after examining the objections, Returning Officer Umesh Sharma concluded that Puri had not violated any requirements under the Representation of the People Act.

Sharma stated in his order that no defect had been found in Puri’s nomination papers that could justify their rejection.

Following the decision, Katare and Congress MLA Atif Aqeel announced that they would approach the court against the order.

Calling the decision an attack on Indian democracy, the Congress leaders said in a statement that Puri’s nomination should have been rejected despite what they described as significant errors.