<p>A bench of justices Altamas Kabir and H L Dattu reserved the verdict after hearing the Attorney General G E Vahanvati, counsel for the Yadavs, and the petitioner Vishwanath Chaturvedi.<br /><br />The SC had ordered a CBI inquiry on March 1, 2007, into the alleged accumulation of disproportionate assets by Yadav, his sons Akhilesh and Prateek and daughter-in-law Dimple, on a public interest litigation (PIL) by an advocate Vishwanath Chaturvedi, reportedly a Congress leader.<br /><br />Unlike the precedent of hearing review petitions in the judges' chambers, the petition is being heard in the open court at the request of Yadav.<br /><br />Seeking to review its order, Yadav and his family members submitted that there was no evidence against them who are being harassed by political adversaries.<br /><br />Senior counsel Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Yadavs, assailed the apex court's earlier order claiming it would "set a dangerous precedent" of allowing political opponents to file "false and frivolous" petitions against their detractors.<br /><br />During the arguments, Vahanvati, while refraining from going into the merits of the allegations against the Yadavs, cited a number of judicial pronouncements to drive home the point that the apex court has powers to order a CBI inquiry in "exceptional cases."</p>
<p>A bench of justices Altamas Kabir and H L Dattu reserved the verdict after hearing the Attorney General G E Vahanvati, counsel for the Yadavs, and the petitioner Vishwanath Chaturvedi.<br /><br />The SC had ordered a CBI inquiry on March 1, 2007, into the alleged accumulation of disproportionate assets by Yadav, his sons Akhilesh and Prateek and daughter-in-law Dimple, on a public interest litigation (PIL) by an advocate Vishwanath Chaturvedi, reportedly a Congress leader.<br /><br />Unlike the precedent of hearing review petitions in the judges' chambers, the petition is being heard in the open court at the request of Yadav.<br /><br />Seeking to review its order, Yadav and his family members submitted that there was no evidence against them who are being harassed by political adversaries.<br /><br />Senior counsel Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Yadavs, assailed the apex court's earlier order claiming it would "set a dangerous precedent" of allowing political opponents to file "false and frivolous" petitions against their detractors.<br /><br />During the arguments, Vahanvati, while refraining from going into the merits of the allegations against the Yadavs, cited a number of judicial pronouncements to drive home the point that the apex court has powers to order a CBI inquiry in "exceptional cases."</p>