The Supreme Court chose not to order a court monitored investigation of the Rafale Fighter Jet Deal, where the Central government purchased 36 Dassault Rafale fighter jets.
On 14th December 2018, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment:
Multiple petitioners -- advocate ML Sharma, lawyer Vineet Dhanda, AAP MP Sanjay Singh and politician Yashwant Sinha -- claimed that the Rafale Fighter Jet Deal suffers from serious procedural irregularities. They brought forward the following concerns:
The Central government claims it signed an inter-governmental agreement in September 2016 with France. The Central government procured 36 Dassault Rafale fighter jets for an undefined price, which allegedly is much higher than the price at which the UPA government had procured the jets.
On 14th November 2018, the Court reserved judgment. One month later, on 14th December, the Court delivered its judgment.
1. Did the Central Government follow proper procedure, given that it went from purchasing 126 jets to only 36 jets?
2. Does the Rafale Fighter Jet Deal suffer from pricing irregularities, considering that the per unit cost of the new deal is higher than what was earlier negotiated under the UPA government?
3. Did the Central Government propose Reliance Defence Ltd as Dassault Aviation's Indian Offset Partner without the approval of the Minister of Defence, as required by Clause 8.6 of the Defence Offset Guidelines?
4. Is the Rafale Fighter Jet Deal an inter-governmental agreement between India and France?