Respond to probe plea against Vadra, court tells Centre

‘How could a firm grow to Rs. 500 crore worth with an investment of Rs. 5 lakh?’

October 11, 2012 03:58 pm | Updated November 29, 2021 01:15 pm IST - Lucknow

The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on Thursday granted the Union government three weeks to respond to a writ petition filed by social activist Nutan Thakur, seeking a directive to order a probe into corruption charges against Robert Vadra and real estate major DLF.

A Division Bench of Justices Uma Nath Singh and Virendra Kumar Dixit heard Dr. Thakur’s petition and asked the Centre to explain why the allegations against Mr. Vadra should not be investigated.

India Against Corruption members Kejriwal and Prashant Bhushan have alleged that Mr. Vadra had been hugely favoured by DLF and he had bought property worth crores of rupees between 2007 and 2010 with an unsecured interest-free loan of Rs. 65 crore given by DLF.

Mr. Vadra and DLF, however, have denied the allegations.

Unanswered questions

Dr. Thakur, who runs an NGO in Uttar Pradesh, said in her petition that despite their denials, some basic questions remained unanswered.

How could a company grow to Rs. 500-crore worth with a mere initial investment of Rs. 5 lakh, the petition said.

Dr. Thakur told The Hindu that while allegations were being levelled against Mr. Vadra and DLF, no inquiry had been ordered. She said that in her petition she had questioned the involvement of Ministers in the case, who had rubbished these allegations even without conducting a proper independent enquiry.

“The common man wants to know the truth behind these allegations. The common man is brought under enquiries, so why should the high-profile not face independent enquiries into corruption allegations?”

“Release details”

The petition also requested the government to officially release the facts related to the case and said that since Mr. Vadra was the son-in-law of the president of the ruling party, it was the government’s duty to explain itself.

Additional Solicitor-General Ashok Nigam opposed the petition, saying it was based on hearsay and was not maintainable.

The next hearing is scheduled for November 21.

Top News Today


Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.