The Modi government has refuted the charge, claiming that it never "misled" the Supreme Court on the CAG report. (Photo: AP)

Facing a fierce Opposition attack that it misled the Supreme Court by stating that the pricing of Rafale deal has already by been examined by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) and the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), the government on Saturday moved an application in the apex court seeking a correction in the order that kicked off a fresh war of words over the Rafale deal a day before.

The Union government has stated that it never misled the Supreme Court on the CAG report issue and that there was only a "typing error" which the government counsel has flagged today with a plea for correction.

Explaining the status of the audit of Rafale deal, the defence ministry had submitted documents in a sealed cover, stating that the "CAG is working on a report looking into the Rafale deal" and added that the procedure of Parliamentary scrutiny on the report has been tabled in the Parliament.

A senior government source said, "This clearly seems to be a typing error in the order which is not an uncommon thing. Errors do happen and once a mention is made, the courts do fix them."

To emphasise that the "error was in the judgment not in the submissions", the defence ministry today approached the Supreme Court seeking a correction.

That the Union of India is moving this application seeking a correction with regard to two sentences in paragraph 25 of the judgment delivered by the court on Friday (December 14). The error in these two sentences, as explained hereinafter, appears to have occurred perhaps on account of a misinterpretation of a couple of sentences in a note handed over to the court in a sealed cover.

The observations in the judgment have resulted in a controversy in the public domain.

In its documents, the government had stated in the court:

3. That the issue of "pricing" is dealt with in paragraphs 24 to 26 of the judgment. In regard to the pricing details being placed before the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and Parliament, the following statements have been made in paragraph 25 of the judgment:

"The pricing details have, however, been shared with Comptroller and Auditor General [hereinafter referred to as "CAG"], and the report of the CAG has been examined by the Public Accounts Committee [hereinafter referred to as "PAC"]. Only a redacted portion of the report was placed before the Parliament and is in public domain."

4. That these statements appear to have been based on the note submitted by the Union of India, alongwith the pricing details, in two sealed covers. These sealed covers were submitted to this Hon'ble Court in compliance with the order dated 31.10.2018, which had directed, inter alia, that the "Court would also like to be apprised of the details with regard to the pricing/cost, particularly the advantage thereof, if any, which again will be submitted to the Court in a sealed cover".

5. That in the said note, which was in the form of bullet points, the second bullet point carries the following sentences

"The Government has already shared the pricing details with the CAG. The report of the CAG is examined by the PAC. Only a redacted version of the report is placed before the Parliament and in public domain".

6. That it would be noted that what has already been done is described by words in the past tense, i.e. the Government "has already shared" the price details with the CAG. This is in the past tense and is factually correct. The second part of the sentence, in regard to the PAC, is to the effect that "the report of the CAG is examined by the PAC.

The Supreme Court's verdict on Friday dismissing several petitions seeking an inquiry into the deal to acquire 36 Rafale fighter jets from France pushed the Congress and other Opposition parties on the backfoot. Soon, they struck back claiming that the NDA government had "misled the apex court on the issue of Rafale deal".

The purported fact stated in para 25 of the SC Jt on Rafale about a CAG report is not only factually incorrect on at least 3 counts, it is not known when & how the Govt communicated this to the SC. It was not part of the record shared with us. Several other false facts in its Jt pic.twitter.com/G9ZMWE54re Prashant Bhushan (@pbhushan1) December 14, 2018





The petitioners and Opposition parties led by the Congress attacked the order with lawyer Prashant Bhushan saying that the verdict has "some grotesque factual errors", including "a CAG report on Rafale deal placed before the Public Accounts Committee Of Parliament" which examines all CAG reports.

At the heart of the uproar is the Point 25 on page 21 of the Supreme Court order. It says, "The pricing details [of Rafale deal] have, however, been shared with the Comptroller and Auditor General (hereinafter referred to as 'CAG'), and the report of the CAG has been examined by the Public Accounts Committee (hereafter referred to as 'PAC'). Only a redacted portion of the report was placed before the Parliament, and is in public domain."

The Opposition has picked this point and gone on the warpath to call the order "flawed" and blamed the government for misleading the court to believe that the pricing question has already been examined by the CAG and even has been examined by the PAC.

PAC Chairman Mallikarjun Kharge said on Friday that the committee never received any report by the CAG on Rafale deal and there is no question of it having discussed the report. He added, "Where is this report of the CAG? Show it to us if it exists. I spoke to the office of the CAG, which confirmed that its report on the Rafale deal is not yet ready."

Later on Saturday, to mount the offensive, Kharge summoned the government counsel and the Comptroller and Auditor General to depose before the PAC and clarify.

Sources said that the government wants the issue to be resolved and its counsel in Supreme Court has filed a mention of the error in the Supreme Court and as normal practice the apex court may order the rectification after scrutiny of the submissions.

Interestingly, petitioner Prashant Bhushan, in an exclusive interview with India today TV on Friday night admitted, "The government did not make an official mention about the PAC having carried out the scrutiny of a CAG report on the Rafale deal during the hearings on the case."

He, however, added, "Somehow the government communicated this (that the PAC has already examined a CAG report on Rafale deal) to the Supreme Court."