2G: CBI chargesheet does not show money trail, says petitioner

The first chargesheet filed by the CBI in the 2G spectrum allocation case does not show any money trail, according the petitioner in the case before the Supreme Court. The petitioner is an NGO, the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL). The chargesheet was filed before a Special Court here on April 2.

The NGO has also claimed that the chargesheet provides very little evidence of conspiracy and contains no facts which are not already in the public domain. The chargesheet also does not target real powerful culprits and instead goes at great length to exonerate high-ranking politicians, Government servants, a corporate lobbyist, as well as various telecom companies and their heads, the CPIL said in a written note.

The CPIL will hand over this written note to the Supreme Court on April 26, the next date of hearing, the lawyers representing the NGO said. The lawyers, however, said some parts of the written note may be modified after taking into account the findings in the second chargesheet of the CBI. The CBI is likely to file the second chargesheet on April 24 regarding the bribery aspect of the 2G scam.

The issue of losses has not been investigated with respect to the presumptive losses due to the scam provided by the CAG.

“The CBI has assumed the role of an auditor and invented a new parameter called ‘Aggregate Gross Revenue' (AGR) per MHz per Year – which was virtually unheard of prior to now. It is a blatant attempt to handle the optics of the presumptive losses of Rs 1.76 lakh crore presented in the CAG Report, in view of which the Supreme Court had requested an investigation. Instead a new figure of Rs 30,984.55 crore has been invented by the CBI to help Government manage the political fallout. This is a direct violation of the Supreme Court's orders,” the CPIL said.

The CPIL highlighted that there was no mention in the chargesheet regarding investigation into the allegation of grant of huge loans by the public sector and other banks to some of the companies which have succeeded in obtaining licences in 2008 and whether the Telecom Department officers were signatories to the loan agreement executed by the private companies.

With the exception of Unitech, the CBI chargesheet does not have a single word about the 85 ineligible companies mentioned in the Comptroller and Auditor General's Report, CPIL said. The chargesheet does not go into how 110 companies got rejected using the same parameters which allowed 121 applicants in, of whom 85 were ineligible of getting through, CPIL said.

The NGO added that the chargesheet does not name the officers who were responsible for analysing these applications, including those in the Access Services Cell.

COMMENT NOW