LIVE
‘97 lakh voters deleted in TN’: Stalin urges President to intervene in SIR irregularitiesThe News MinuteSIR in West Bengal: How Were 90 Lakh Voter Names Deleted? | Prasenjit Bose ExplainsFrontline MagazineUP MLC Polls: Vote counting underway for 11 Legislative Council seatsNews On AIRDelhi SIR: Supreme Court Asks ECI To Consider Extending October 30 DeadlineLawBeatCan the Chief Election Commissioner be removed? What the law saysThe Week30 Day Limit Lapses But ECI Yet to Reply to RTI Request for Two Election Commissioners DissentTheWire.in'Didn't want Mamata to contest another election': Suvendu Adhikari on why he kept Bhabanipur seatThe Times of IndiaIndia High Court halts exit notice against actor Imran Khan over anti-election commission protestJurist.orgKarnataka SIR Final Voter List 2026 Out: Check Your Name, Download Electoral Roll PDF and Find Updated Serial NumberJagran JoshFormer BJP MP Dharmendra Kashyap Joins Samajwadi Party Ahead of Uttar Pradesh Electionswww.nationpathindia.com
8010003355
Main Menu

Rafale review: Supreme Court admits three ‘secret’ documents as evidence

SC Admits 3 'Mystery' Docs as Evidence in Re-Examining Rafale Order

The Supreme Court on Wednesday, 10 April, turned down the Centre’s preliminary objections in the Rafale review case and allowed three classified documents to be considered as evidence while it re-examines its earlier Rafale order.

The government’s objection

During hearings that ended on 14 March, Attorney General KK Venugopal argued that certain papers the petitioners wanted to rely on were confidential and had been “stolen” from the Defence Ministry. He also said that the petitioners and the journalists who had published the papers had breached the Official Secrets Act.

When the bench questioned this, Venugopal argued that official government records which have not been made public cannot be admitted as evidence without permission from the authorities concerned. As a result, the judges took up only the narrow question of whether these documents were admissible.

The question mattered for the review because the documents contained new and damaging information brought out by N Ram of The Hindu and other journalists. Even if the court had ruled in the government’s favour on this point, the petitioners would still have been able to press their other arguments.

Who is involved

Those arguing against the Attorney General include Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and Prashant Bhushan, who had asked the court to review its Rafale ruling.

Two judgments from the bench

Two judgments were to be delivered by the bench, one written by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and the other by Justice KM Joseph. This pointed to the possibility of separate majority and minority opinions. It was not known which of the two the third judge on the bench, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, had agreed with.

The ruling dealt only with the preliminary objections raised by the Centre, namely whether the documents described as confidential could be admitted while the review petitions are heard.

See also: latest election news and profiles of political leaders

Originally published on 10 April 2019. Rewritten on 9 October 2026.






Comments are Closed