Delhi court declines complaint against PM, Dayanidhi Maran
31 Jan 2013 6:42 AM IST
A city court on Wednesday refused to entertain a complaint seeking registration of an FIR against Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and former telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran for their alleged role in the 2G scam.
Special Judge Sangita Dhingra Sehgal said, ‘The present complaint pertains to 2G spectrum scam and the grievance, if any, of the complainant can only be addressed by the special court so nominated to deal and try the matters pertaining to the 2G spectrum scam.
‘I am of the considered view that this court being special court dealing with the cases of the Prevention of Corruption Act, has no jurisdiction to entertain the present application.Hence, prayer made by the complainant is declined. Ordered accordingly.’
RTI activist Vivek Garg had filed a complaint in the court accusing the Prime Minister and Maran of unlawfully changing and diluting the original Terms of References (ToRs) for vacation and reallocation of spectrum leading to the 2G scam. He had also sent a complaint to the CBI and to the Anti-Corruption Branch of Delhi government earlier before moving the court.
The court relied on the order of the Supreme Court and other documents placed before it by the CBI informing about the creation of special court for all matters pertaining to 2G spectrum allocation scam.
‘It is clear that no other court except the special court of OP Saini, Special CBI Judge, Patiala House court, can deal or try any matter related to 2G spectrum scam and there is no dispute that the complaint filed by the complainant pertains to the the 2G spectrum scam,’ said the court.
The court also noted CBI’s submission made earlier in the status report that Garg’s complaint has been merged with the FIR already registered by it against Maran and others in October 2011 and it does not require registration of any new FIR or direction for probe.
The court had reserved its order on the complaint on 17 January after hearing arguments from the CBI as well as the complainant.
COURT FIXES 11 FEB TO CONSIDER CHARGESHEET AGAINST TELECOMS
A special court on Wednesday fixed 11 February for considering taking cognisance of chargesheet filed against Airtel, Vodafone and others for alleged irregularities in allocation of additional spectrum to them during the NDA rule.
Special CBI Judge O P Saini deferred it after CBI prosecutor A K Singh said that the agency has filed 143 sets of documents related to the case in the court during the day and he needs some time to go through them. The prosecutor told the court that these documents should be taken on record.
The court allowed the plea and fixed 11 February for considering taking cognisance on the charge sheet in which former telecom secretary Shyamal Ghosh and three telecom firms – Bharti Cellular Ltd, Hutchison Max Pvt Ltd (now known as Vodafone India Ltd) and Sterling Cellular Ltd (now known as Vodafone Mobile Service Ltd) – have been named as an accused.
‘It is submitted by the public prosecutor that two boxes of documents have been placed on record today itself apart from the earlier documents. He requires some time and accordingly he submits that adjournment for atleast a week be given.
‘... Put up for consideration on cognisance on 11 February,’ the judge said.
The CBI has booked all the accused for the offences of criminal conspiracy (120-B) of the IPC and under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Special Judge Sangita Dhingra Sehgal said, ‘The present complaint pertains to 2G spectrum scam and the grievance, if any, of the complainant can only be addressed by the special court so nominated to deal and try the matters pertaining to the 2G spectrum scam.
‘I am of the considered view that this court being special court dealing with the cases of the Prevention of Corruption Act, has no jurisdiction to entertain the present application.Hence, prayer made by the complainant is declined. Ordered accordingly.’
RTI activist Vivek Garg had filed a complaint in the court accusing the Prime Minister and Maran of unlawfully changing and diluting the original Terms of References (ToRs) for vacation and reallocation of spectrum leading to the 2G scam. He had also sent a complaint to the CBI and to the Anti-Corruption Branch of Delhi government earlier before moving the court.
The court relied on the order of the Supreme Court and other documents placed before it by the CBI informing about the creation of special court for all matters pertaining to 2G spectrum allocation scam.
‘It is clear that no other court except the special court of OP Saini, Special CBI Judge, Patiala House court, can deal or try any matter related to 2G spectrum scam and there is no dispute that the complaint filed by the complainant pertains to the the 2G spectrum scam,’ said the court.
The court also noted CBI’s submission made earlier in the status report that Garg’s complaint has been merged with the FIR already registered by it against Maran and others in October 2011 and it does not require registration of any new FIR or direction for probe.
The court had reserved its order on the complaint on 17 January after hearing arguments from the CBI as well as the complainant.
COURT FIXES 11 FEB TO CONSIDER CHARGESHEET AGAINST TELECOMS
A special court on Wednesday fixed 11 February for considering taking cognisance of chargesheet filed against Airtel, Vodafone and others for alleged irregularities in allocation of additional spectrum to them during the NDA rule.
Special CBI Judge O P Saini deferred it after CBI prosecutor A K Singh said that the agency has filed 143 sets of documents related to the case in the court during the day and he needs some time to go through them. The prosecutor told the court that these documents should be taken on record.
The court allowed the plea and fixed 11 February for considering taking cognisance on the charge sheet in which former telecom secretary Shyamal Ghosh and three telecom firms – Bharti Cellular Ltd, Hutchison Max Pvt Ltd (now known as Vodafone India Ltd) and Sterling Cellular Ltd (now known as Vodafone Mobile Service Ltd) – have been named as an accused.
‘It is submitted by the public prosecutor that two boxes of documents have been placed on record today itself apart from the earlier documents. He requires some time and accordingly he submits that adjournment for atleast a week be given.
‘... Put up for consideration on cognisance on 11 February,’ the judge said.
The CBI has booked all the accused for the offences of criminal conspiracy (120-B) of the IPC and under provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Next Story
