The special investigation team (SIT) on Friday told the Supreme Court that a draft final report has been prepared after conducting "thorough professional and scientific investigations" in the case relating to the death of Congress MP Shashi Tharoor's wife Sunanda Pushkar.
Delhi Police, in its affidavit filed in the apex court, has said that the final report draft has been sent to the prosecution department of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi for "legal scrutiny" and it would be filed in the concerned trial court after being vetted.
The SIT, after conducting thorough professional and scientific investigations, has prepared a draft police report under section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code and sent the same to the prosecution department of Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi for legal scrutiny.Delhi Police Affidavit
"As soon as the draft police report is received after legal vetting by the prosecution department, the same shall be submitted before the competent trial court for consideration and concomitant judicial proceedings," the affidavit, filed by Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) Romil Baaniya who is supervising the SIT probe, said.
Pushkar was found dead under mysterious circumstances in a suite of a five-star hotel in Delhi on the night of 17 January 2014.
The top court had in February sought the response of Delhi Police on a plea filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy seeking a court-monitored SIT probe into Pushkar's death.
While issuing notice to the police on Swamy’s plea, a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had left open the question of maintainability of the petition.
Swamy had filed an appeal in the top court against Delhi High Court's 26 October 2017 verdict dismissing his plea for a probe into Pushkar's death by a court-monitored SIT.
While rejecting the plea, the high court had termed his public interest litigation (PIL) a “textbook example of a political interest litigation”.
Swamy, in his plea before the high court, had alleged that the police had "botched up" the probe and accused Tharoor of "interfering" in the investigation as a minister in the erstwhile UPA regime and later.
The high court had chastised the BJP leader and his lawyer, who was a co-petitioner before it, for making "sweeping allegations" in the petition against Tharoor and the Delhi Police without giving any basis for such accusations.
The high court had observed that Swamy ought to have mentioned his political affiliation as well as that of Tharoor in his plea as these facts were important for adjudication of the case.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)