A lawyer filed a PIL in which he alleged discrepancies in the Rafael fighter jet deal fighter jet deal with France and sought stay on it.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court Wednesday agreed to hear next week a PIL seeking stay on Rafale fighter jet deal between India with France.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud considered the submissions of advocate M L Sharma that his plea be listed for urgent hearing.
In his PIL, Sharma alleged discrepancies in the fighter jet deal with France and sought stay on it.
It’s really shocking that on the basis of a PIL by an Advocate, the case of Rafale Deal has been admitted by the Honorable Supreme Court. The advocate is a chamcha of UPA. Thanks Air Force has already clarified the price factor, which includes Training, Armament, Modified Avionics, Maintenance, Spares etc. We all know the capability of our own HAL. The people who are against Rafale deal want to purchase some thing like LAMBRETTA OR VIJAY SUPER scotter in 2020.
India’s Judiciary is poking their nose everywhere with subtle idea of grabbing all the powers from executive. They don’t give thought to the concept of separation of power among the three pillars of democracy. If judges apply their mind properly half of the cases can be dropped at initial hearing. But the system has been deliberately with view to encourage the business of lawyers and connected people thereby ducking blood and money of common man of India. Lawyers and judges promote the interest of each other since most of the judges of higher judiciary were advocates. To get rid of this faulty system it is high time to devise new system to recruit Judges of higher judiciary through competitive exams on all India basis.
It’s a tragedy for a nation where lawyers and judges are taking decision on country’s defence. Hope they are prepared to take up rifles to fight with the Pakis and Chinese when required. If not, then let military to think about their defence needs.
Since SC, lawyers and the Judges are so well aware of country’s defence, let them go out themselves and fight in the battlefield and against terrorists. If shot, they can conveniently blame Congress for it.
SC has no business to admit such cases for hearing. Let them mind their assigned role instead of poking their nose into everything.
SC has too many cases to attend. They have been piling up and are awaiting judgment.
Now question arises if bona-fide of a defence deal under way need be brought to SC purview for judicial scrutiny. These are security issues – very sensitive to the nation. At the outset SC is expected to dismiss the PIL.