The Supreme Court on Thursday paved the way for day-to-day trial in the
2G spectrum licence allocation scam by calling upon the government to set up a dedicated court to hear the case.
Keeping up the heat on the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which is probing the multi-crore 2G scam, the Supreme Court sought action against corporate
beneficiaries in the case and asked the investigating agency to get the chargesheet cleared by it before filing it in the trial court.
A bench comprising Justice G. S. Singhvi and Justice A. K. Ganguly - which is monitoring the probe in the scam - also restrained all courts in the country from passing any order which could impede the probe.
In what would put the case on fast-track, the bench asked attorney general G. E. Vahanvati to look into the issue of having a special court exclusively for the case and report on the issue at the next hearing on March 1. Telling the CBI to go all-out against the suspects, the bench said, "We have a large number of persons who think they are law unto themselves. Law must catch up with them. It should be done with greater expedition. Merely because they are in the list of Forbes or they are millionaires does not make any difference."
While stressing that it did not want to interfere with the course of the investigation, the court said it wanted to ensure that the CBI had a free hand to investigate and question anyone.
Referring to short remands being granted by the magistrate for custodial interrogation of former telecom minister A. Raja, the court asked whether the freedom to probe was being curtailed by short remands.
"The matter is very complex and many angles need to be probed. There must be some freedom, otherwise the whole process will be frustrated," the court said.
The restraint order by the SC virtually gives the CBI a free hand to call for questioning or arrest anybody it suspects of involvement in the conspiracy. It also preempts all attempts by the accused to delay investigation by seeking any sort of restraint, including anticipatory bail, in their favour.
The SC passed the restraint order after the CBI submitted before that it would file a chargesheet in the case by March 31.
Looking at the need to proceed with the trial without delay, the court showed urgency by deciding to do the ground work for a speedy trial even before a formal chargesheet was filed. The bench said if an existing special court was entrusted with the job, it would not be able to proceed with the trial on a day-to-day basis in view of other cases already pending before it. It, therefore, wanted to set up a dedicated court for hearing the case, it said.
The judges quizzed the CBI on the action taken so far against the corporate beneficiaries of the 2G licences. " You (CBI) must have noticed something in the enforcement directorate (ED) report… There is a prima facie case against beneficiary companies. What about them?" the bench asked.
With the name of a telecom company being mentioned by the counsel for the Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), on whose petition the court was monitoring the probe, CBI counsel K. K. Venugopal pointed to a portion in the status report where the agency had mentioned the names of four officers of the company being questioned by it. Repeatedly during the hearing, the court made it apparent that its monitoring would not end unless it was satisfied with the job done by the CBI." Mere summoning and examining them (corporate beneficiaries) is not enough.
You tell us the status on investigation with regard to the conspirators," Justice Singhvi observed.
After Venugopal took the court through the CBI and ED status reports on the 2G probe submitted in sealed covers before the court on Thursday, CPIL counsel Prashant Bhushan said the court should take the assistance of experts in monitoring the investigation to ensure that it was going in the right direction. He pointed out that the hawala case had not ended in conviction despite the SC monitoring the probe.
Though the bench said it would consider Bhushan's argument in due course, it decided to go beyond mere monitoring and directed the CBI to first let it assess the chargesheet before filing it before the trial court.
With the court raising questions on inaction with regard to conspirators, Venugopal said the CBI would not be diluting the case.
"Put the draft chargesheet before us,"the court said.
The CBI said it had added four more officers to the team to ensure a chargesheet by March 31.
Venugopal said a further chargesheet with regard to transactions in foreign countries would be filed by May 2011 as it would require it to issue letter rogatory.
The agency further sought three more months for probing the role of banks which had issued loans for licence.
Courtesy: Mail Today
Special 
