Friday, August 24, 2012

SC:" Suspicion, however, strong, cannot take the place of legal proof. Allegations against FM without any basis"

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, has today considered opinion while adjudicating over both the Special Leave Petitions (criminal) moved by Mr. Subramanyam Swami,and has clearly observed that no case is made out to interfere with the order dated 4.2.2012 in C.C. No. 01 (A) / 11 passed by Special Judge CBI (04) (2G Spectrum Cases), New Delhi or to grant reliefs prayed for in I.A. No. 34 of 2012. Special Leave Petition (Crl.)No. 1688 of 2012 is, therefore, not entertained, so also I.A. No. 34 of 2012 in Civil Appeal No.10660 of 2010 and they are accordingly stand rejected and the allegation that Shri P. Chidambaram had over-ruled his officers’ views and had conspired with Shri A. Raja is without any basis. Mr. Subramanyam Swami had asked to include Shri. P. Chidamdaram, FM as an accused in the charge-sheets of 2G Scam. But the Hon. Apex Court has further observed in para-52 of its recent landmark judgment that "Criminal conspiracy cannot be inferred on the mere fact that there were official discussions between the officers of the MoF and that of DoT and between two Ministers, which are all recorded. Suspicion, however, strong, cannot take the place of legal proof and the meeting between Shri P. Chidambaram and Shri A. Raja would not by itself be sufficient to infer the existence of a criminal conspiracy so as to indict Shri P. Chidambaram. Petitioners submit that had the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister intervened, this situation could have been avoided, might be or might not be. 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. We are of the considered view that materials on record do not show that Shri P. Chidambaram had abused his position as a Minister of Finance or conspired or colluded with A. 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 Shri P. Chidambaram had deliberately allowed dilution of equity of the two companies, i.e. Swan and Unitech. No materials is also available even prima facie to conclude that Shri P. 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 Shri A. Raja.

1 comment:

  1. Hiya! I am very interested in if you have a lot of subscribers to your journal?


Popular Posts on our Law Office Blogs