Comments
Finance Minister P. Chidambaram got a reprieve on Friday when the Supreme Court rejected petitions filed by Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy and the Centre for Public Interest Litigation seeking a CBI probe into his alleged role in the 2G spectrum allocation scam. Justices G. S. Singhvi and K. S. Radhakrishnan dismissed the appeal filed by Swamy against a trial court order rejecting his plea to make Chidambaram a co-accused with former Telecommunications Minister A. Raja and also CPIL’s application in this regard.
Swamy had alleged that Chidambaram was party to two decisions, “that is, keeping the spectrum prices at the 2001 level and dilution of equity by the two companies”. The trial court had held that these two acts were per se not criminal.
‘No conspiracy’
Upholding the trial court’s order, Justice Radhakrishnan said: “Criminal conspiracy cannot be inferred on the mere fact that there were official discussions between officers of the MoF and that of DoT and between two Ministers… the meeting between Chidambaram and Raja would not, by itself, be sufficient to infer the existence of a criminal conspiracy so as to indict Chidambaram.”
The Bench noted that Chidambaram and Raja met on May 29, 2008 and June 12, 2008 for resolving the then outstanding issues relating to the allocation and pricing of 2G and 3G spectrum.
“… Even before those meetings, as instructed by the Finance Minister, the Finance Secretary and Telecom Secretary had already met on April 24, 2008, had agreed that it might not be possible to charge operators already having allocation up to 6.2 MHz and the principle of equity and level playing field would require that the operators who get fresh allotment of spectrum up to 6.2MHz for GSM too should not be charged for Spectrum up to 6.2 MHz for GSM. Therefore, the allegation that Chidambaram had overruled his officers’ views and had conspired with Raja is without any basis.”
On the contention that had the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister intervened, “this situation could have been avoided”, the Bench said: “A wrong judgment or an inaccurate or incorrect approach or poor management by itself, even after due deliberations between Ministers or even with Prime Minister, by itself cannot be said to be a product of criminal conspiracy.”
The Bench said: “We are of the considered view that materials on record do not show that Chidambaram had abused his position as a Minister of Finance or conspired or colluded with Raja so as to fix low entry fee by non-visiting spectrum charges fixed in the year 2001.
No materials are also made available even for a prima facie conclusion that Chidambaram had deliberately allowed dilution of equity of the two companies, i.e. Swan and Unitech. No material is also available even prima facie to conclude that Chidambaram had abused his official position, or used any corrupt or illegal means for obtaining any pecuniary advantage for himself or any other persons, including Raja.” The Bench held that no case was made out to interfere with the special court’s order dated February 4.
Comments
COMMENT NOW
Comments
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of TheHindu Businessline and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.