August 09, 2026 03:39 pm (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
‘A morning I will cherish’: Raghav Chadha meets PM Modi, shares photos from ‘enriching’ meeting | Delhi Mercedes crash kills 70-year-old woman: Cop’s son behind wheel, beer bottle found | Indian-origin woman accused of ‘visa fraud’ on X: US Attorney steps in with major clarification | US Senate passes Russia sanctions bill: India can face Trump’s 100% tariff threat | Expired meat, rotten vegetables found at Bengaluru's luxury hotels, legal action begins | 'I'm ready to be humiliated': Vijay, Udhayanidhi Stalin clash in Tamil Nadu Assembly over Cauvery dispute | 'They don't need Mohan Bhagwat's certificate': Priyanka Gandhi Vadra's sharp reply to RSS chief's Gen Z remark | 'Students, Gen Z, ask me anything': Rahul Gandhi launches Instagram Q&A, responds to Jharkhand protest | PM Modi goes Gen Z, urges Indians to share 'Get Ready With Me' videos on National Handloom Day | Former Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal sentenced to 10-year jail term in 2013 rape case as Bombay HC overturns acquittal

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.