NEW DELHI, August 14: Delhi high court today demanded an explanation from the CBI as to why it had not thrown any light on the payment of travel and dearness allowances (ta/da) to Bihar legislators, who were alleged to have been bribed by Congress president Sitaram Kesri during his elections to the Rajya Sabha in 1988 and 1992.

A division bench consisting of Justices Jaspal Singh and Manmohan Sarin sought the explanation after going through the CBI's latest status report on the probe into allegations against Kesri for amassing wealth disproportionate to his known source of income and receiving and giving bribes to 22 MLAs during the elections.

The CBI, which has been investigating the case after a public interest petition was filed by Patna=based freelance journalist Madhuresh Kumar in the high court, was directed by the court to investigate various aspects in the case, including the cash payment of ta/da to the legislators.

The bench said that one such MLA, Madhu Singh, was paid Rs 1,16,000 in cash between January 3 and February 8, 1992.

The payment of ta/da to legislators is generally made by the State Assembly secretariat through cheques. The court said that the CBI's last response had left many a question unanswered like the details about the `bribe' given to the MLAs.

``There is lot to be seen in it,'' the court observed.

Additional solicitor general Altaf Hussain, appearing for the CBI, said that the investigating agency was probing this question as well. He was directed to submit the latest report in the investigation on or before September 9 and the case was adjourned to September 16.

The bench also asked the CBI to clarify how it concluded that Kesri was maintaining his monthly household expenditure at merely Rs 1,450 when the Congress president had employed two servants in his house. It also asked the CBI to state the reason why it climbed up from Rs 1,000 (as was stated earlier) to Rs 1,450 about monthly household expenditure.

Senior counsel G L Sanghi objected saying that it was a confidential investigation and should not be made public as it will affect the image of Kesri, who was in no way said to be involved in the case.

He said, ``such revealing of information will amount to publicity damage and there is no remedy for any such damage.''

The Supreme Court had also observed that restrain should be maintained in the case where a disclosure of an information will lead to publicity damage. The court, however, observed, ``If you join public life, you should have to be ready for bouquets and brickbats.''

Sanghi said that unless the court finds that the investigation was conducted with insincerity and slackness, it should not interfere in the process as it had already expressed its satisfaction over the progress of the inquiry.

To this the court observed, ``There is absolutely no doubt in our minds about the sincerity and integrity of the CBI investigation, but we are of a positive view that the March 4 judgement is no hurdle in the way of our monitoring the case.''

``We are not here to substitute the previous judgement, but to see that the investigation progressed in a proper manner,'' the bench added. Counsel for the petitioner Shanti Bhushan urged the court to direct the CBI to seek the Income Tax department's report on the assets and properties of Kesri, which was found disproportionate to his known sources of income.

``It is the duty of the CBI to go into assets and properties of Kesri and the report can be of great help in this regard'', Bhushan said .y

Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.