New Delhi: The petitioners in Rafale fighter jet deal moved the Supreme Court on Wednesday for a review of the judgement. The petitioners are Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and Prashant Bhushan. (Also read: ‘Why CAG Report Never Reached PAC,’ Asks Rahul) Also Read - Supreme Court To Start 'Hybrid Mode' Hearings on Experimental Basis From March 15

Delivering its verdict on December 14, the apex court had dismissed all the petitions seeking a court-monitored investigation into the Rafale deal. The apex court said that it did not find any material to show commercial favouritism. Also Read - There Should be Some Screening: Supreme Court Seeks OTT Regulations From Centre

It had said there was no occasion to doubt the decision-making process in the multi-billion dollar Rafale fighter jet deal with France. The bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi had said there had been a necessity of fighter aircraft and the country cannot remain without fighter jets. Also Read - Dissent Cannot be Termed Seditious, Says Supreme Court; Junks Plea Against Farooq Abdullah

It had said, “We are satisfied that there is no occasion to doubt the process. A country can’t afford to be under-prepared. It is not correct for the court to sit as an appellant authority and scrutinise all aspects.”

On the choice of an offset partner, CJI Gogoi had said, “There is no reason for interference in the choice of offset partner and the perception of individuals can’t be the basis for a roving inquiry in a sensitive issue of defence procurement.”

Vindicating the Government’s stand, Gogoi had said, “We can’t compel the Government to purchase 126 aircraft and it’s not proper for the court to examine each aspect of this case. It isn’t a job of the court to compare pricing details.”

The four petitions seeking probe into the deal were filed by Prashant Bhushan, Arun Shourie, former Finance minister Yashwant Sinha, advocates ML Sharma and Vineet Dhanda, and AAP MP Sanjay Singh. All the petitioners had assailed the pricing of 36 fighter aircraft and the induction of an offset partner replacing the HAL.

The Centre had defended the deal on the grounds of an “urgent requirement” for national security and had justified the scrapping of the earlier deal for 126 aircraft as it was taking too long to reach conclusion.