Congress President Rahul Gandhi in an affidavit on Wednesday tendered “unconditional apology” to the Supreme Court for “incorrectly attributing” a remark on the Rafale order to it.
Rahul Gandhi has filed a three-page affidavit stating his unconditional apology to the apex court.
In the affidavit, Gandhi stated that he had “unintentionally and inadvertently” linked its Rafale case order to his “Chowkidar chor hai” phrase against Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
“(Rahul Gandhi) unconditionally apologises for the wrongful attributions to this Hon’ble Court. The Deponent further states that any such attributions were entirely unintentional, non-willful and inadvertent,” the new affidavit said according to a report in NDTV.
Gandhi further said that “he holds the court in the highest esteem and respect” and “never sought or intended to, directly or indirectly, commit any act that interferes with the process of administration of justice.”
He also requested the top court to close the contempt proceedings against him. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the matter on Friday.
On April 30, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, counsel for Rahul Gandhi had said that the Congress president will file a fresh affidavit with an apology after BJP MP Meenakshi Lekhi on Tuesday told the Supreme Court that Gandhi has only expressed regret even as he “deliberately” put words in the mouth of the court.
In an earlier affidavit, Gandhi had said that he had no intention of dragging the court into politics and alleged that it was the petitioner, BJP MP Meenakshi Lekhi, who is playing politics.
Rahul Gandhi, while welcoming the Supreme Court’s decision to examine fresh revelations on the Rafale deal on 10 April, claimed a moral victory and said that the court has made it clear that Prime Minister Narendra Modi “committed theft”.
“The Supreme Court has made it clear that ‘chowkidarji’ (watchman) has committed a theft,” Gandhi told reporters during a rally in Amethi.
Lekhi file a criminal contempt petition against Gandhi, following which, the court said the remark was “incorrectly attributed” to it.