Supreme Court dismisses petition by Swaraj Abhiyan to probe purchase of Agusta Westland Helicopter by Chhattisgarh

The Supreme Court today dismissed the petition filed by Swaraj Abhiyan seeking probe into the alleged anomalies in the purchase of Agusta Westland helicopter by the State of Chhattisgarh..A Bench of Justices AK Goel and UU Lalit delivered the verdict after hearing a batch of petitions..“We broadly find that no case is made out for interference by this Court for issuing a direction as sought in absence of an allegation of extraneous consideration being substantiated.”.It was the petitioners’ contention that the State of Chhattisgarh had entered into a sham agreement with Sharp Ocean Investments Limited to acquire the VVIP chopper without following due process of law which caused financial loss to the exchequer..The petitioner had also alleged involvement of Abhishak Singh, son of Chief Minister Raman Singh, as a beneficiary in the procurement and had submitted that the excess price was paid to benefit Abhishak Singh..It was the case of the petitioner that even though there were other tenders for the same helicopter, it was not considered by the State and hence extraneous payments were made to procure the helicopter..The Bench observed in its judgment that,.“There is nothing on record to show that the Helicopter could have been procured for a lesser price. No person claiming to give a better deal has come forward.”.The Court also ruled out that commission was paid to Singh stating that there is no clear evidence that loss was caused to the public exchequer..It held,.“There is no material to prima facie hold that beneficiary of the transaction was Abhishak Singh. We do not consider it necessary to go into the allegation of mere procedural irregularities. We broadly find that no case is made out for interference by this Court for issuing a direction as sought in absence of allegation of extraneous consideration being substantiated.”.While dismissing the petition, the Court also observed,.“A petition under Article 32, without clear element of public interest, cannot be entertained at the instance of a political rival merely on account of an alleged procedural irregularity in the decision making which can be challenged at appropriate forum by the aggrieved party.”.Read the judgment below.