Telephone exchange case: Probe agency for Maran’s custodial interrogation

DMK leader Dayanidhi Maran is not cooperating in the alleged telephone exchange case and his custodial interrogation was necessary “to ascertain the actual usage” of telephone lines for purported benefit of family venture SUN TV, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) told the Supreme Court on Friday.

“The custodial examination of Mr Maran is required to ascertain the actual usage of these lines for the benefit of SUN TV, which is in his exclusive knowledge. There is evidence of forging/tampering and manipulation of records and custodial interrogation is necessary to ascertain the modus operandi of the usage of the illegal telephone exchange, to ascertain the actual usage and consequential loss to the public exchequer,” the affidavit filed before a Bench headed by Justice TS Thakur said.

The Bench, also comprising Justice V Gopala Gowda, has deferred the hearing on Maran’s plea to November 27 and asked the DMK leader to file his response by the next date of hearing.

“The petitioner was granted one opportunity to cooperate with the investigation, which he failed, resulting into the rejection of the anticipatory bail...the petitioner was examined but he refused to co-operate with the investigation and was evasive to many questions. He gave contradictory replies during his examination,” the affidavit stated.

The agency further said that there was evidence on record to substantiate the allegations that Maran in criminal conspiracy with the CGMs of BSNL “illegally” obtained over 750 telephone numbers under service category. “No approval of DoT was obtained wilfully for any of these connections,” it said.

The Apex Court had earlier extended the stay on a Madras high court order, cancelling Maran’s bail in the case. 

The Apex Court had on August 12 sought the CBI’s response on Maran’s plea, challenging the HC order and questioned its decision to arrest him in a case registered in 2013.

Maran had moved the Apex Court challenging the Madras high court’s decision to cancel his bail and asking him to surrender in a case.