New Delhi,  The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed an appeal against denial of sanction to prosecute Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath in an alleged 2007 hate speech case.

A bench, headed by Chief Justice N.V. Ramana and comprising Justices Hima Kohli and C.T. Ravikumar said: "It appears from the record that the forensic report of the CD which forms the basis of the prosecution was found to be tampered and edited as per the report dated 13.10.2014, submitted by the CFSL which position has not been disputed by the appellants herein."

The bench pointed out that the investigation was closed on May 6, 2017, however a protest petition was pending before the trial court. "In the circumstances, we do not think it necessary to go into the contentions raised by both sides on the issue of denial of sanction for prosecution and the legal pleas sought to be raised in relation to the said issue," it added.

During the hearing in the matter, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the Uttar Pradesh government, submitted that nothing remains in the case and the CD was sent to the CFSL, and it was found to be tampered with. He said the issue raised by the petition has already been examined by the high court and added: "You cannot go on beating a dead horse now after 15 years just because the man happens to be CM today."

In February 2018, the high court had said it did not find any procedural error in the decision-making process of refusal to grant sanction to prosecute. The petitioner Parvez Parwaz and another person challenged the Allahabad High Court's order and sought fair investigation into an alleged hate speech by Adityanath, when he was an MP, which caused the 2007 Gorakhpur riots.

Advocate Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, representing the petitioners, referred to one of the issues mentioned in the high court which reads: "Whether the state can pass an order under Section 196 CrPC in respect of a proposed accused in a criminal case who in the meantime gets elected as the Chief Minister and is the executive head as per the scheme provided under Article 163 of the Constitution." Ayyubi said the high court did not address this issue and added that due to the denial of sanction to prosecute, a closure report has been filed.

The top court said: "Having considered the material placed on record, we are in agreement that the subsequent events have rendered the present appeal into a purely academic exercise."

"We think it appropriate that the legal questions on the issue of sanction be left open to be considered in an appropriate case. Consequently, this appeal is dismissed."