The CBI on Friday closed the disproportionate assets case against Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav, citing lack of evidence. The clean chit to Mr Yadav in the six-year-old case comes at a time when the SP government in Uttar Pradesh is facing severe criticism for failing to contain the communal riots in Muzaffarnagar.
“The CBI has closed the preliminary enquiry (PE) against Mulayam Singh Yadav and his family on account of grossly insufficient evidence,” the agency said.
The probe agency cited the Supreme Court’s order of December 13, 2012, whereby it was said that the income, assets and expenditure pertaining to Dimple Yadav, wife of Uttar Pradesh chief minister Akhilesh Yadav, should be excluded from those of her other family members.
“This order necessitated re-assessment of the evidence collected during the inquiry, and a fresh look in accordance with the order of the Supreme Court,” the CBI said in its statement. “We are being very transparent about all cases, including this, and are ready to stand any legal scrutiny,” CBI director Ranjit Sinha said. Sources said the CBI will inform the Supreme Court about its decision next week.
After examining a large number of persons, including the Yadav family, and collecting several documents, the CBI said, “Careful examination of documents, statement of witness and the version of the suspects during the course of further inquiry, has not brought out sufficient evidence supporting the allegation of possession of any disproportionate assets, jointly or individually, against Mulayam Singh Yadav and his family members.”
The CBI further said the PE in the case, which was registered in 2007, could not be concluded earlier due to litigations and pendency of the review petitions.
The CBI also said that since Mr Yadav had not joined the probe earlier in 2007, the agency had calculated his income, that of his sons Akhilesh and Prateek and daughter-in-law Dimple to Rs 2.63 crore. This had to be changed after the December 2012 judgment of the Supreme Court.
While the CBI earlier listed seven points to show why there was a difference in the figures of disproportionate assets from 2007 to 2013, claiming large advances were earlier shown as assets as well as expenditure, leading to double accounting, it said: “The same stands corrected now.” The CBI reasoned that the gifts received by the Yadav family, which had been accounted as income-tax, “have now been validated by examining the donors, donees, bank statements, income-tax returns and personal ledgers”.