"The CBI has closed the Preliminary Enquiry (PE) against Mulayam Singh Yadav and his family on account of grossly insufficient evidence," the agency said.

In a detailed reasoning, the CBI cited Supreme Court's order of December 13 last year whereby it was said that the income, assets and expenditure pertaining to Dimple Yadav, wife of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav, should be excluded from those of her other family members.
"This order necessitated re-assessment of the evidence collected during the enquiry, and a fresh look in accordance with the order of the Supreme Court," the CBI said in its statement here.
"We are being very transparent about all cases including this and are ready to stand any legal scrutiny," CBI Director Ranjit Sinha said.
The CBI said the PE in the case which was registered in 2007 could not be concluded earlier due to litigations and pendency of the review petitions. The CBI said that since Mulayam had not joined the probe earlier in 2007, the agency had calculated his income, that of his sons Akhilesh and Prateek and daughter in law Dimple to Rs 2.63 crore. This had to be changed after the December 2012 judgement of the Supreme Court.  CBI will inform the Supreme Court about its decision next week.
During its enquiry, the agency examined a large number of persons including the Yadav family and collected several documents. "Careful examination of documents, statement of witness and the version of the suspects during the course of further enquiry, has not brought out sufficient evidence supporting the allegation of possession of any disproportionate assets, jointly or individually, against Mulayam Singh Yadav and his family members," the CBI said.
CBI listed seven points to show why there was difference in the figures of disproportionate assets from 2007 and 2013, claiming large advances were earlier shown as assets as well as expenditure, leading to double accounting. "The same stands corrected now," the CBI said.
A number of heavy advances, despite being refunded subsequently, were earlier taken as assets. "These refunds stand corroborated from the bank account statements.
"Earlier these advances were shown as assets on the basis of their reflection in a particular Income Tax returns, even though such amounts were not be found in subsequent returns," the CBI said.
The third point, CBI reasoned that the gifts received by the Yadav family, which had been accounted as Income tax, "have now been validated by examining the donors, donees, bank statements, Income Tax returns and personal ledgers".
The CBI also said a large number of expenditure items have been found to be refund of loans taken during the check period of April one, 1994 to March 21, 2004.

On the construction of house at Saifai in Etawah, whose valuation was recommended, it was found that out of the total cost of Rs 1.41 crore incurred on it, the contribution of Yadav and his son was less than 10 percent.
The house was constructed by Sughar Singh Yadav, head of the undivided family during the check period, the CBI said.
The agency also said that enquiry has not brought out any contribution of Yadav and his family members in the alleged benami properties in the name of Samajwadi Party and Ram Manohar Lohia Trust as mentioned by the petitioner Vishwasnath Chaturvedi in his plea before the Supreme Court.
The alleged stakes of Yadav and his family members in two educational institutions have been found not correct. The allegation of benami properties acquired by his wife Sadhna in the name of his son Prateek (who was a minor during the check period) have not been found to have any basis, CBI said.
During the present enquiry, it was found that an amount of Rs 51.85 lakh was earlier shown as income from loan in respect of Mulayam. However, it has been now been found to be a part of the gift amount of Rs 79.35 lakh separately taken as income.
"This correction has led to reduction of Rs 51.85 lakh in the income of Yadav," the agency said.
There have been instances which went against the Yadav family which included an expenditure of Rs 8.42 lakh on account of Akhilesh's foreign education, election expenses to the tune of Rs 25.95 lakh and a large number of items added on account of interest paid on loans, cash withdrawals reflected in Income Tax returns, stamp duty charges and gifts given to others.
"During the further enquiry conducted from December 2012 onwards in the light of Supreme Court orders, each and every item brought out in the earlier findings of CBI has been thoroughly re-examined and re-assessed.
"Care has been also taken to probe every single item finding mention in the writ petition. After exploring each possible avenue, CBI has closed the PE against Yadav and his family members, on account of grossly insufficient evidence," the CBI said.


Latest News from India News Desk