July 23, 2026 02:21 am (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
'We won't leave Jantar Mantar until Dharmendra Pradhan resigns': CJP draws red line | 'Don't waste our time': Supreme Court snubs plea on NEET protest crackdown | Trump's 200% tariff bomb on generic drugs: Here's how India could be hit | Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra lead Congress march to PM Modi's residence over student protest crackdown | 'We can't ignore his concerns': Delhi HC gives Sonam Wangchuk big relief, clears shift to private hospital | 'Students are being tortured': Mamata Banerjee offers to join CJP protest in Delhi | Sikkim tunnel horror: 8 dead, several feared trapped after NHPC project collapse | As NEET protests intensify, PM Modi defends govt action, calls for 'foolproof' education system | After NEET storm, Modi govt faces fresh challenge as farmers march to Delhi over India-US trade deal | Jantar Mantar reclaimed! CJP defies overnight police eviction, returns to protest site

Supreme Court will hear Rafale verdict review pleas in open court

| @indiablooms | Feb 26, 2019, at 09:20 pm

New Delhi, Feb 26 (IBNS): The Supreme Court today allowed open court hearings on pleas seeking review of its December 14, 2018 verdict on Rafale deal case, reports said.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, Justice S.K. Kaul and Justice K.M. Joseph agreed to hear the two review petitions, which challenge the December 14 judgment that give the Centre a clean chit on the Rafale deal.

“The prayer for open court hearing is allowed,” the bench said.

While the petitioners in the first case are former Union ministers Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie, and advocate Prashant Bhushan, the second was filed by Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh.

The petitioners claim the Supreme Court had been misled with "incorrect claims" made by the Centre.

In its December order, the Supreme Court had said it found no reason to justify the corruption allegations in the case.

"There is no evidence of commercial favouritism to any private entity," the court had then said.
 

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.