ribune News Service
New Delhi, December 15

The Centre today moved the Supreme Court seeking correction in the Rafale deal judgment where a reference has been made about the Comptroller and Auditor General report and Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee, saying “misinterpretation” of its note has “resulted in a controversy”.

“The error… appears to have occurred, perhaps, on account of a misinterpretation of a couple of sentences in a note handed over to this court in a sealed cover,” the Centre said, seeking “correction in two sentences of paragraph 25 of the December 14 verdict”.

In a huge relief to the Narendra Modi government, the SC had yesterday dismissed petitions seeking a probe into the India-France deal for procurement of 36 Rafale fighter jets.

Giving a clean chit, a three-judge Bench of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice KM Joseph had said pricing details of the Rs 58,000 crore deal had been examined by the CAG and PAC.

“The pricing details have, however, been shared with the CAG, and the report of the CAG has been examined by the PAC. Only a redacted portion of the report was placed before Parliament, and is in public domain,” read a portion of paragraph 25 of the 29-page verdict.

However, Congress leaders and petitioners had pointed out that the CAG was yet to submit its report and there was no question of the PAC having examined it. “The government lied in the Supreme Court that the CAG report was presented in the House and in the PAC, and PAC has probed it. The government said it (the report) is in public domain. Where is it? Have you seen it?” asked senior Congress leader and PAC chairman Mallikarjun Kharge.

Now, in its application filed in the top court, the Centre said: “The observations in the judgment have also resulted in a controversy in the public domain, and would warrant correction by this court in the interest of justice.”

“The submission by the Union of India, to the effect that the report of the CAG ‘is’ examined by the PAC, was a description of the procedure followed in the normal course, in regard to the reports of the CAG. The very fact that the present tense ‘is’ is used would mean that the reference is to the procedure which will be followed as and when the CAG report is ready.

“Similarly, the statement that only a redacted version of the report ‘is’ placed before Parliament, is referred to in the judgment as ‘only a redacted portion of the report was placed before Parliament, and is in public domain’,” the Centre submitted in its application.

“…Unfortunately, an element of misinterpretation of the statement made in the note/bullet points… appears to have crept in. This has also resulted in a controversy being raised in the public domain,” read the Centre’s application.