Contents

The Bail bombshell

Disappointment all over as bail eludes 2G accused, again 2G bail: Judge makes hard point but what about personal liberty? Kanimozhi, three other accused in 2G case move HC for bail Distressed Kanimozhi takes to meditation in jail Karunanidhi upset over denial of bail to daughter Raja says, We have to fight, fight, fight; trial to begin 11 Nov 04 05 07 08 09 10

The 2G note ruckus

2G spectrum: What, where and who of a scandal 2G note row: Pranab meets PM, Sonia after new letter surfaces BJP cries foul over Finmins note on 2G scam Pranab and Chidambaram meets PM over 2G note 2G: Note that damns Chidu may have come from whistleblower JPC wants Finance Ministrys controversial note on 2G

13 15 16 17 18 21

The Chidu connection

Court defers hearing on plea against Chidambaram in 2G scam 2G scam: Court reserves notice, CBI opposes probe against Chidambaram

23 24

Do the numbers add up? Maxis Mayhem

PAC to re-examine CAG report on 2G scam 2G: Loss numbers dont matter much, but crime is key

26 27

Was Malaysian govt silent partner in Maxis-Maran deal? Damning FIR: CBI says Maran got Rs 550 crore for Maxis favour CBI may have enough on Maran to ask for his arrest Maxis owns effective 99% of Aircel through Suneeta Reddy

30 32 34 38

The Backstory

2G Scam: A comprehensive timeline 2Gs Dabangg man- Prashant Bhushan How CBI pulled the rug under Raja on spectrum loss issue 2G scam: Raja, 16 others charged with criminal breach of trust 2G scam: What are the exact charges under section 409? 2G scam: Who said what in this tale of twists and turns

41 46 48 50 52 53

Chapter: 1

The Bail bombshell

Disappointment all over as bail eludes 2G accused, again

Pallavi Polanki Nov 3, 2011
stunned a jam-packed courtroom into silence. There was much anticipation of bail being granted to some of the 2G accused, especially after the CBI had not opposed bail for five of the eight who had applied for bail at the special CBI court.

The bails applications are dismissed. With that one-line delivered, Special CBI judge OP Saini

But the Judge dashed everyones hopes leaving the accused and relatives in utter shock and disbelief. Putting up a brave front, DMK MP Kanimozhi, who was joined by her husband and son in court, after the order was read out, was heard saying to her well-wisher that the court wanted to send out a strong message. She hugged her son while people around her, some of them in tears, tried to console her. Also present was former Telecom Minister and accused A Rajas wife who seemed shaken by the blanket dismissal of all bail applications. Dont worry, she said to Kanimozhi. Kanimozhis husband was visibly upset, briefly losing his cool. Joining them in what was clearly a very emotional time, was south Indian actress Khushboo. It was at this point that the normally composed Kanimozhi was irked at the medias presence at the courtroom. Are you human beings, she said to journalists who were crowding around her family. The order must have come as blow also for Bollywood producer Karim Morani, who had applied for bail on health grounds. His daughters broke down. Kalaignar TV MD Sharad Kumar looked dejected as he sat with his family. Former Telecom Secretary Siddhartha Behura was seen discussing order with his lawyer and family. The order runs into 76 pages. The others accused in the 2G case whose bail pleas were denied today were RK Chandolia, Rajas former private secretary, Swan Telecom promoter Shahid Balwa and Asif Balwa and Rajiv Aggarwal, directors of Kusegaon Fruits and Vegetables. While lawyers held discussions with their clients the media was asked to leave the courtroom. The accused then emerged one by one, accompanied by their close relatives, out of the courtroom. The disappointment and heartbreak as they walked out of court was impossible to miss. More emotional scenes followed before they were taken back into custody by the police. All eyes now are on the Supreme Court that has reserved its order on the bail pleas of five of corporate heads who are accused in the 2G case. Trial in the 2G case begins on 11 November.

2G bail: Judge makes hard point but what about personal liberty?
Akshaya Mishra Nov 3, 2011

In the 2G case judges are making the unusual the norm. The jury is still out whether it agrees with
The special CBI court today rejected the bail applications of Kanimozhi, parliamentarian and daughter of DMK chief M Karunanidhi, and seven others accused in the spectrum allocation scandal. This, even after the investigation has been completed, chargesheet submitted and charges framed by the court in the respective cases. Under judicial practice, its not normal to deny bail to the accused after charges are framed.

the fundamental principles of justice. Also, it raises the question whether the judicial thought process is being too differential to the public sentiment in this particular case.

Kanimozhi, who has been charged with accepting bribe, criminal conspiracy to cheat the exchequer and criminal breach of trust, has been in Tihar Jail since May 2011. Her repeated bail pleas have been thrown out by the courts her plea that she should get relief since she is a woman has cut no ice with the judges. The fate of the bail applications of other accused, who have been in Tihar jail longer, has been the same. It is interesting, given the Supreme Court, which is monitoring the high profile case, has put no restriction on the lower courts to grant bail to the accused. It has asked courts to go by the merit of each case while taking a call. Its apparent that extraneous factors are weighing heavy on the minds of the judges. Its possible they want to make an example of the case and send out the message to the rich and the powerful that they cannot take the judiciary for granted and make a mockery of the law by manipulating it at will. It is possible they want to reassure the public at large that while other institutions of the democracy have suffered erosion of credibility, the judiciary still stands firm and dependable. Theres absolutely no dispute if that is the case. Moreover, the 2G case is the biggest scandal in independent India and the accused deserve exemplary treatment. However, the harshness in deciding bail for the accused raises a few questions. Presumed innocent till proved guilty thats one of the basic principles of the Indian law. The denial of bail to the accused runs counter to that principle. The bail is the norm, jail is the exception

principle introduced by Supreme Court judge V Krishna Iyer in the 1970s and followed by courts all over the country has been turned on its head in the current case. The issues of personal liberty of the accused and the fairness of the judicial process kick in at some point. What if some of the accused were found not guilty after the end of the trial? Is the apprehension of the investigating agenciesthe CBI in this case that evidence could be tampered with is strong enough an argument to deny freedom to the accused? Why must the judiciary take a decision prejudicial to the interest of the accused even when the investigators are no more keen on keeping them in prison? Judge OP Saini of the special CBI court, who dismissed the bail pleas, however, maintained that his order was not influenced by any external factors but solely keeping in mind the facts and circumstances of the case. A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passion being aroused. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of consequence to community, he said. He asserted that the rights of accused were important but the rights of victims and witnesses were no less valuable. Nothing to argue here. The court also said that lack of opposition from the CBI to the bail plea did not mean much in terms of the law. Its a very tough position. But it looks tad unfair to the accused. They have been punished even before being found guilty. Does it amount to judicial authoritarianism? The basic principles of the law are being rewritten by the judges. Hope it stands scrutiny of the law itself.

Kanimozhi, three other accused in 2G case move HC for bail

PTI Nov 5, 2011
trum allocation case, moved the Delhi High Court today for bail.

New Delhi: DMK MP Kanimozhi and three others, arrested for their alleged roles in the 2G specBesides Kanimozhi, the three others who moved the high court against a special court order denying them bail two days ago, are Kalaignar TV MD Sharad Kumar and Kusegaon Fruits and Vegetables Pvt Ltd directors Asif Balwa and Rajiv Agarwal. DMK Supremos daughter Kanimozhi has been confined in Tihar Jail since her arrest on May 20. She was denied bail on Thursday by the trial court despite CBI not objecting to pleas for bail by her and four others.

Special Judge OP Saini denied them the bail saying the charges against them are of grave nature and the CBIs concession of not objecting their bail pleas was of no consequence in the eyes of law. The CBI had preferred not to oppose the bail pleas of Kanimozhi, Kalaignar TV MD Sharad Kumar, Kusegaon Fruits and Vegetables directors Asif Balwa and Rajiv Agarwal and Bollywood filmmaker Karim Morani, whose names had figured in the supplementary charge sheet filed on April 25. The accused have been in the jail for last five to nine months. Denying bail to Kanimozhi, the court had also rejected her plea for it on grounds of being a woman, saying that she belongs to upper echelons of society and is also a member of Parliament and cannnot be suffering on account of being a woman.

Distressed Kanimozhi takes to meditation in jail

PTI Nov 9, 2011

New Delhi: Denied bail in the 2G case, DMK MP MK Kanimozhi, who is lodged in Tihar prison

since May, is now taking meditation lessons on the jail premises. On 3 November, the 43-year-old Rajya Sabha MP, who is the daughter of DMK chief M Karunanidhi, had wept and hugged her mother Rajathi Ammal minutes after special CBI court rejected her bail plea in the 2G case. According to jail officials, Kanimozhi is doing sadhana, engaging herself in introspection, spiritual empowerment and dhyan as part of the meditation lessons. These lessons are being imparted by Divya Jyoti Jagrati Sansthan, the biggest NGO within the Tihar Jail complex engaged in rehabilitation and reformation programme inside the jail premises. Kanimozhi has participated in one of the activities spiritual empowerment conducted for correction and reformation of inmates inside the prison premises, a jail official said. The DMK lawmaker is lodged in Jail No 6 since 20 May. Some of the positive work done by the NGO towards inmates involves spiritual empowerment for correction and reformation, positive engagements in cricket and music, drug abuse prevention and livelihood programmes. Kanimozhi had moved the Delhi High Court after a special court here denied her bail on 3 November. The high court today sought CBIs response on her pleas.

Karunanidhi upset over denial of bail to daughter

PTI Nov 3, 2011

Chennai: DMK chief M Karunanidhi is very upset over rejection of bail to his daughter and
party MP Kanimozhi in the 2G spectrum case. Karunanidhi was hoping that Kanimozhi would be given bail as the CBI has not opposed her bail plea. He is very upset and had not spoken to anybody, including family members after he came to know of the dismissal of the bail application today, sources close to Karunanidhi told PTI here. Noting that the charges levelled against Kanimozhi and seven others in the case were of very serious nature, a Delhi court dismissed their bail pleas. The others whose bail petitions were dismissed were former Telecom Minister A Rajas erstwhile Private Secretary R K Chandolia, Swan Telecom promoter Shahid Usman Balwa, Kalaignar TV MD Sharad Kumar, Kusegaon Fruits & Vegetables directors Asif Balwa and Rajiv Agarwal and Bollywood filmmaker Karim Morani.

Raja says, We have to fight, fight, fight; trial to begin 11 Nov

Pallavi Polanki Oct 22, 2011
They have charged me with everything, former Communications Minister Andimuthu Raja, prime accused in the 2G spectrum scam, told his wife in Tamil during hearings scheduled to read out the charges against him on Saturday morning. What is thereWe have to fight, fight, fight, he told another well-wisher with a smile when the latter greeted him inside the Delhi court where Special CBI Judge OP Saini framed the charges against the 17 accused. The accused, accompanied by their police escorts and an army of lawyers, packed the small Central Bureau of Investigation court that was already jam-packed with reporters and worried relatives of the accused. Dressed in a white shirt and black trousers, the first accused in the 2G case (Raja) looked the least bit troubled by the criminal breach of trust charge framed against him (among a series of other charges under the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act). If he is found guilty, he could face a life term. But despite Rajas apparent nonchalance, his wife didnt seem to share his chirpy mood. Dressed in a bright magenta silk saree, she sat next to a distraught Rajathi Ammal, mother of DMK Rajya Sabha MP and 2G accused Kanimozhi, and wife of DMK boss M Karunanidhi. Rajathi Ammal watched her daughter thoughtfully as Kanimozhi put on a brave face, talking and smiling to acquaintances who were present in court. Dressed in a green and black salwar kameez, Kanimozhi appeared to be at ease and seemed cheerful as she chatted with her son and husband, who were also sitting with Rajathi Ammal. She has been charged under section 120 (b) read with section 409 of the IPC (criminal conspiracy) and section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Her bail hearing is scheduled for Monday. Swan Telecom promoter Shahid Balwa, in striped white shirt and jeans, looked unflustered as he watched the judge read out the charges. His mother looked almost tearful, praying with folded hands, as she watched the proceedings, perplexed. With her were her husband, Balwas wife and other members from his family.

After the charges were read out, there was much confusion on how and under what section each of the accused had been charged. Following the conclusion of the proceedings, the flurry of activity continued, with the accused sitting huddled with their lawyers and family members, discussing charges and planning their next course of action. The trial is scheduled to begin on 11 November.

Chapter: 2

The 2G note ruckus

2G spectrum: What, where and who of a scandal

FP Staff Sep 28, 2011

The 2G spectrum scandal is turning out to be a multi-faced mystery with a new revelation surfacing every day. The latest shocker is the Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjees note to the prime minister, which seeks to highlight that the current Home Minister P Chidambaram, who was the finance minister then, could have prevented the illegal 2G spectrum allocations. The scam was enormous to begin with; it is getting bigger with the role of top ministers emerging. There are even hints that the prime ministers office was in the know of the illegalities but preferred to stay a mute spectator. This brings Prime Minister Manmohan Singh into the picture. Firstpost gives you a quick recap of what the 2G case was really about, how it unfolded and who were the people initially implicated in the case. The 2G spectrum licenses were announced in 2007 and according to the initial announcement made by the government, eight new companies were to be given telecom licences to start mobile services. The order to the effect stated that the allocation would be made on a first-come-first-served basis. The licences were issued at the prices fixed in 2001 to keep tariffs low. The idea behind the policy was to provide cheaper services to the customers. But the major loophole, a point which was exploited by the companies later, was the lack of clarity on the terms and conditions on the firms and their shareholding pattern. Some successful bidders availed their licenses at lower prices and then sold them off at huge profits. Some companies were suspected to be proxies popped up by bigger players. They sold a majority of their shares immediately after availing the licenses. The flawed policy pointed to the complicity of the department of telecom itself. For instance, Swan Telecom bagged licence for 13 circles for Rs 1,537 crore and then offloaded 45 percent of shares to UAE based Etisalat for Rs 4,500 crore. The loss to the exchequer was precisely because the policy ensured that while the initial bidders got the licenses at cheaper prices; they got away with selling these at huge profits. According to the estimate of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, the presumptive loss from the 2G scam was Rs 1.76 lakh crore. The latest speculation is that while the bidders were selling off their

shares to foreign companies, those sales were actually overseen by the finance ministry at that time. This is precisely why Chidambaram is being implicated in the scam now. People whove been implicated in the scam Former telecom minister A Raja, who is believed to have pushed this rather flaky policy. In his defence Raja is stating that the allotment of spectrum was made on basis of recommendations by TRAI. Raja was arrested on 2 February, and charged with criminal conspiracy, cheating, abuse of office and forgery. Siddhartha Behura, who was the secretary of the DoT then, has been charged with cheating and abuse of office. RK Chandolia, who was the personal secretary of A Raja has been charged with cheating and abuse of office too. On 8 February, the CBI also arrested Shahid Usman Balwa, Director of Swan Telecom Pvt Ltd, on charges of criminal conspiracy, cheating and forgery. Swan Telecom is believed to be front company for Anil Ambanis Reliance Communications. In March, Asif Balwa, brother of Shahid Balwa, and Rajiv Agarwal from Kusegaon Fruits & Vegetables Pvt Ltd, were arrestd by the CBI. Balwa is alleged to have paid a bribe of nearly Rs 214 crore to A Raja for allotting licenses at throwaway prices. The bribe was paid through a circitous route which involved the Kusegaon Fruits and Vegetables Pvt Ltd company, Cineyug Films and Kalaignar Television in Chennai. In April, the CBI followed it with arrests of Vinod Goenka, Director, Swan Telecom Pvt Ltd, for criminal conspiracy, cheating and forgery, and the partner of Shahid Balwa in DB Realty, which had floated Swan Telecom in the first place. The other persons who were arrested in the case were Sanjay Chandra Director, Unitech, Gautam Doshi Group MD, Reliance ADAG, Hari Nair Company Secy, Reliance ADAG and Surendra Pipara Senior VP, Reliance ADAG charged with abetment to cheating, bribing government servants and forgery. Kalaingar Television is owned by Karunanidhis daughter Kanimozhi and his first wife Dayalu Ammal. While Kanimozhi was arrested when the CBI filed its second chargsheet, Dayalu Ammal was not because the CBI stated that she only speaks Tamil and thus could not be involved in the scam. Kanimozhi, is charged with cheating, criminal conspiracy and accepting bribes. Along with her, Sharad Kumar the Managing Director of Kalaignar TV was also arrested on the same charges. The 2G spectrum scam has thus revealed a major political and corporate nexus which ensured massive profits for those involved. As more details and the consequent name-calling goes on, it is clear that getting to the bottom of this scam is not going to be an easy task for the CBI. For a complete look at our 2G scam coverage click here.

2G note row: Pranab meets PM, Sonia after new letter surfaces
PTI Nov 1, 2011
gress president Sonia Gandhi after surfacing of his letter which suggested his ministrys controversial 25 March note on 2G was revised after consultations with Cabinet Secretariat and the PMO. Though it was not clear what transpired in these meetings, it is believed that the issue related to the 26 September letter written by Mukherjee to the Prime Minister figured. Congress, meanwhile, refused to be drawn into the issue but insisted there was no controversy. Circumstances surrounding the note have been discussed to death. We must keep in mind that the note is reiteration of what happened between December 2003 and February 2011. If at all there is any concern with regard to interpretation and sequence of the matter in the letter, then the judgement should be left to the JPC, which has a mandate to look into the entire gamut of the spectrum allocation from 1998 to 2009, party spokesperson Manish Tewari told reporters. The Finance Ministry note of March 25 had suggested that the then Finance Minister P Chidambaram could have averted the 2G scam in 2008 if he had insisted on auctioning of Spectrum, triggering a huge controversy when it became public in September. At the height of the row over his ministrys note, Mukherjee had written to the prime minister suggesting that the sentence which appeared to blame Chidambaram was revised after consultation with the Cabinet Secretariat and the PMO. Tewari said the 2G issue has gone to the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), Parliaments Public Accounts Committee and the Supreme Court after the reiteration of the developments between December 2003 and February 2011 appeared in the note. When you have a JPC, PAC and the court looking into the matter, rather than reading out judgements on an issue, allow the agencies to come out with their final findings, the Congress spokesman said. Asked whether the JPC will be look into the latest letter of Mr. Mukherjee, Tewari said that in the course of its deliberations, it is obviously going to look into these matters. He, however, added let us not come to premature judgements and allow the JPC to complete the probe.

Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee on Tuesday met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Con-

BJP cries foul over Finmins note on 2G scam

PTI Oct 31, 2011

New Delhi: BJP today sought to create ruckus in the Joint Parliamentary Committee probing the
2G scam that a Finance Ministry note seen by Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee has been tampered with. At the meeting, the BJP members said the note of 23 March, two days prior to the controversial 2G note that sought to implicate then Finance Minister P Chidambaram, was changed. The word perusal has been substituted for the word approval in the note put up by additional secretary in the Finance Ministry, the members claimed. The note said that based on the discussions and deeper and detailed examination of the facts of the case, a chronology of the facts has been prepared which is culled out of details of the relevant notes and letters exchanged from time to time. The 23 March note says some of the interpretations now put forth on detailed analysis of records/correspondences are at variance with the replies sent to PAC and

CAG earlier.

The official says the note may be put up to the finance minister for his perusal before it is shared with the Cabinet Secretariat and the Prime Ministers Office. Referring to the draft performance Audit report on the issue of licences and allocation of 2G spectrum by the DoT, the note says the Finance Ministry had forwarded its comments on each of the issues raised in the draft report to DG (Audit). These two replies were sent without the perusal by Finance Minister, it adds. But in January 2011, while sending copies of these replies to the principal secretary to the prime minister and the Cabinet Secretariat, the finance minister was informed. We had also submitted extracts of the relevant files as required by the PAC vide letter dated February 17, 2011 to PAC Branch of Lok Sabha Secretariat with copy to Cabinet Secretariat with the approval of the Finance Minister, the note says.

Pranab and Chidambaram meet PM over 2G note

PTI Sep 29, 2011

New Delhi: Amid the raging controversy over 2G note, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee and

Home Minister P Chidambaram today met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to discuss the issue. This is the first time the two Ministers came face to face since the controversy broke out a week ago after the surfacing of a Finance Ministry note which suggested that the 2G scam could have been avoided if Chidambaram as the then Finance Minister in 2008 had insisted on auctioning of spectrum. The meeting of Mukherjee and Chidambaram with the Prime Minister, the first after his return from visit to New York, came on a day of hectic discussions in the Congress camp. In the morning, Mukherjee met Congress President Sonia Gandhi after senior leaders A K Antony and Ahmed Patel held confabulations with her. Later, Law Minister Salman Khurshid and MoS in the PMO V Narayanasamy met Chidambaram before he left for the meeting with the Prime Minister. All is well. Dont worry, Khurshid said after their 20-minute meeting with Chidambaram. The 2G note of the Finance Ministry is believed to have caused frictions between Mukherjee and Chidambaram which the party leadership is keen to end.

2G: Note that damns Chidu may have come from whistleblower
Raman Kirpal Sep 24, 2011

On 11 March this year, long after Andimuthu Raja was safely in jail, a deputy director in the fi-

nance ministrys department of economic affairs prepared a factual dossier on the allocation and pricing of 2G spectrum from 2003 and sent it to the Prime Minister. The document created a sensation on Thursday when news channels and Firstpost made references to it, as it seemed to suggest that the finance ministrys previous incumbent, P Chidambaram, could have stopped the issue of 2G spectrum on the dictates of Raja if he so wanted. The document, ostensibly given out in response to a Right to Information (RTI) query just when Subramanian Swamy was requesting a CBI inquiry into Chidambarams role in the 2G scam, has shaken the UPA government at a time when it could least afford it: both the PM and Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee were away in the US, the former to attend the UN General Assembly session and the latter to attend the annual meetings of the World Bank and IMF. Among other things, the document has raised questions about whether there is serious infighting in the UPA between the former and present finance ministers, and why Mukherjees office would even want to damage Chidambarams reputation now. All three the PM, Mukherjee and Chidambaram are in damage control mode. While the PM has defended Chidambaram strongly, Mukherjee is rushing to New York to meet the PM to sort things out. The question everyone is asking is this: why was the note, signed by PGS Rao, Deputy Director in

the Infrastructure and Investment Division of the Department of Economic Affairs, written in the first place? Did the PMs Office (PMO) ask for it? Unlikely, since whenever the PMO asks for a response from the finance ministry, the note would have been signed by someone at the rank of joint secretary or above. In most cases, the finance minister would himself sign off on notes sought by the PMO. The note is accompanied by this information: A copy of basic facts prepared on allocation and pricing of 2G spectrum is enclosed. This has been seen by the finance minister (Pranab Mukherjee). If the PM did not ask for the 10-page note, the FM himself is unlikely to have done it on his own. Moreover, by 11 March, Raja was already in the jail. On 2 March 2011, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had already filed its first charge-sheet in the 2G scam and the Supreme Court had begun monitoring it. A Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) had been set up to investigate the scam. Then why this note? Insiders in the ministry suggest that the note could have been prepared by a whistleblower who could be either PGS Rao himself or someone else who routed it through him. The discovery of the note through an RTI thus seems providential, for it spares no one by stating the facts. The note just gives a chronology of developments regarding the telecom policy as implemented since 2003. However, it indicts Chidambaram the most. Even the CBI, which has collected all the evidence from the files of the ministries of finance and communications and even the PMO does not have this note. In fact, all the files concerning telecom policy matters and Rajas deals (till December 2010) are in the Supreme Courts safe custody. The whistleblower, however, seems to have kept additional files on this matter. And he churned out a factual story that is difficult to refute. The story starts from 2003. The note says: In 2003, the Union cabinet decided that DoT (Department of Telecommunication) and ministry of finance would discuss and finalise spectrum pricing formulae, which would include incentive for efficient use of spectrum as wells as disincentive for sub-optimal usage. This move was initiated by the then Communications Minister Arun Shourie of the BJP and was approved by the then Finance Minister Jaswant Singh. In 2005, the UPA was in power and Chidambaram was the finance minister. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai), on 13 May 2005, recommended that spectrum charges should have two components: a one-time spectrum charge and annual spectrum charges. Chidambaram did not

question Trai, but suggested that price discovery through auction may not be appropriate. Instead, he suggested a hybrid option of a base fee, combined with revenue share. Chidambaram suggested that it should be put up for consideration to the committee of secretaries and then to the Group of Ministers (GoM). But his department of economic affairs (DAE) did not follow up on it, nor did DoT care about it. The cabinet secretariat constituted a GoM on 23 February 2006 and subsequently DAE asked DoT to include issues relating to spectrum pricing within the ambit of the GoM. DoT, however, maintained that spectrum pricing was within the normal work of the ministry. On 18 May 2007, when Raja had replaced Dayanidhi Maran as communications minister, the finance secretary again requested that spectrum pricing be discussed and determined by the GoM. DoT, however, responded that the use of spectrum was a dynamic issue and it had to be reviewed and considered from time to time in the context of changing technology in consultation with Trai. The finance ministry did not take up the issue further. On 22 November 2007, Finance Secretary D Subbarao (now RBI Governor) argued for an auction of spectrum, but DoT argued against it on the ground that it would disturb the level playing field and existent spectrum holders, who had already paid entry fees in 2001, would go to court. Against this backdrop, Raja issued 122 letter of intent (LOIs) on 10 January 2008, even when he knew that a Telecom Commission meeting was to be held to discuss the revision of entry fees on 15 January 2008. Here comes the blow for P Chidambaram. The 11 March note from PGS Rao says: the fact that a Telecom Commission meeting on the issue was scheduled on 15 January 2008 was also mentioned; no response, however, was sent by DEA to DoT Finally, a note was sent by the then finance minister (Chidambaram) to the Prime Minister on 15 January 2008 The note of the finance minister did not deal with the need, if any, to revise entry fee or the rate of revenue share. Firstpost was the first to put Chidambarams 15 January note in the public domain, and this note had called for burying the past and suggested auctions of additional spectrum only in the future. To prove the factual basis of how telecom policy evolved, the finance ministry whistleblower has listed 31 references in the annexure 10 annexures about exchange of correspondence on the issues relating to spectrum pricing being a part of the GoM; and 21 annexures about correspondence between the PM and the finance ministry on 2G spectrum/licence matter from April 2003 onwards. The Supreme Court on Thursday categorically asked the CBI if they had seen and examined the 15 January 2008 letter of Chidambaram. The CBI said yes and insisted that they did not find anything discriminatory in it. It wasnt enough to charge Chidambaram with any criminal intent. But the CBI has not seen 11 March note of the whistleblower. Either it escaped the CBIs attention or it just wasnt there.

JPC wants Finance Ministrys controversial note on 2G

PTI Sep 23, 2011

New Delhi: The Joint Parliamentary Commiittee, or JPC, investigating the 2G scam, has written
to the Finance Ministry seeking its note, which said 2G spectrum, could have been auctioned if then Finance Minister P Chidambaram had insisted. JPC Chairman P C Chacko said he had written to the Finance Ministry as he was sure members would be demanding it at the next meeting of the Committee on 27 and 28 September. We want to take cognizance of the note, Chacko said about the communication of March this year which said 2G spectrum could have been auctioned if Chidambaram, then Finance Minister, had insisted. Chacko said after news reports surfaced citing the note from Finance Ministry to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, he enquired whether it

was available with the JPC secretariat.

When he was told that it was not among the documents submitted to his secretariat, he wrote to the Finance Ministry, he said. He did not reply when asked whether Chidambaram would be called by the JPC. Sources, however, noted that the Committee had already announced its blanket decision to call all former Finance Ministers and Finance Secretaries from 1998 onwards. Under this sequence, Chidambarams turn will also come, they said.

Chapter: 3

The Chidu connection

Court defers hearing on plea against Chidambaram in 2G scam

PTI Oct 24, 2011

New Delhi: A special CBI court today deferred its hearing on Janata Partys president Subrama-

nian Swamys plea to make Home Minister P Chidambaram a co-accused in the 2G spectrum case. Special CBI Judge OP Saini adjourned the hearing on the plea till 8 November after Swamy pointed out that his application seeking a CBI probe against the minister is pending before the apex court. Earlier, on 15 September, Swamy had sought to record his testimony afresh alleging complicity of Chidambaram in spectrum pricing. He had said the court should bring on record purported new facts that Chidambaram and former Telecom Minister A Raja had a role in deciding 2G spectrum prices and entry fee. The fact that the above named two ministers together decided that the prices of spectrum and entry fee should be lumped together at the 2001 level and decided against the market price of 200708 period for the entry fee, is confirmed by the speech of the Prime Minister in Rajya Sabha on 24 February, 2011, Swamy had said in his application. Swamy, who is pursuing a private complaint in the 2G scam, had also sought to examine CBI officials concerned to establish the nexus of accused persons with others, who have intentionally not been made accused by the prosecuting agency. Watch Video

2G scam: Court reserves notice, CBI opposes probe against Chidambaram

PTI Oct 10, 2011

The Supreme Court today reserved notice against Subramanian Swamys plea for a probe into

Home Minister Chidambarams role in the 2G scam. The court opposed the two applications, one filed by Prashant Bhushan asking for the setting up of an SIT to monitor the 2G case, and two, Subramanian Swamys application seeking probe in Chidambarams role. When hearing commenced, the CBI led the charge, followed by the Central government council, both strongly opposing both demands. The CBI said that demands for an SIT, and to make Tata, Chidu and Anil Ambani accused in the case would be throwing a cloud at CBI investigations. Moreover, the SC found CBIs investigations into the case satisfactory. The CBI and the central government also said there has been no precedent of an SIT being set up over and above the CBI. Reacting to the court verdict, Swamy said: They had no arguments. All their arguments were based on technicality. It would be proper for the Manmohan Singh government to suo moto order a CBI enquiry instead of suffering the shame of having the SC to order to do so. Watch Video

Chapter: 4

Do the numbers add up?

PAC to re-examine CAG report on 2G scam

PTI Oct 10, 2011

New Delhi: Parliaments Public Accounts Committee is all set to reopen examination of the CAG

report on the 2G scam by calling an official who had conducted audit of the controversial allocation of airwaves in 2008. PAC has decided to call RP Singh, former Director General of Audit (Post and Telecommunications), at its next meeting as a witness. The Committee is expected to question him on the methods he used to estimate the losses in the 2G spectrum allocation. PAC Chairman Murli Manohar Joshi gave this ruling at a meeting of the Committee today after Congress member Sanjay Nirupam pointed to media reports which stated that the CAG had overruled a junior official in estimation of losses in the 2G scam. Singh retired from the post on August 31. CAG Vinod Rai and Deputy CAG Rekha Gupta have also been asked to explain to the Committee the methodology used for calculating the 2G losses. RTI queries have revealed that Singh, in internal communications, had pegged the 2G losses at Rs 2645 crore, much less than the presumptive loss of Rs 1.76 lakh crore stated by the CAG in its report. Nirupam, in a letter to Joshi, had said that questioning of CAG officials should be the sole agenda for the meeting to allow members of the committee to comprehend thematter and decide on the future course of action. The PAC draft report on 2G scam had criticised the then Finance Minister P Chidambaram and raised questions on the PMOs first-come first-serve basis policy in allocating the radiowaves. Watch the CNN-IBN report on PAC summoning CAG:

2G: Loss numbers dont matter much, but crime is key

Akshaya Mishra Oct 3, 2011

Rs 1,76, 000 crore is a dramatic number. That was one of the presumptive loss figures from the
2008 2G spectrum allocations made by A Raja at 2001 prices, according to the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, Vinod Rai. It had its impact. It is part of the nations collective consciousness now.

Rs 2,645 crore is not a small number either, though it pales in comparison with Rs 1,76,000 crore. This is the number supposed to have been arrived at by RP Singh, Director General of Audit (Post & Telecommunications), who conducted the 2G audit. Rai, according to a report in The Indian Express, overruled it. He based his estimates on the auction of 3G spectrum prices, among other things, while Singh pegged it on the basis of inflation costs. The Central Vigilance Commission has put the loss figure at Rs 26,000 crore while the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) at a shade beyond Rs 30,000 crore. Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has gone on record saying there waszero loss to the exchequer from the spectrum transaction but not many have bought his estimates. There are other estimates based on the prices at which the beneficiaries sold off spectrum after availing themselves of spectrum on Rajas version of the first-come-firstserved policy evolved during

the NDA regime.

But these numbers serve to confuse rather than clarify. What is central to the 2G scam is not the numbers floating around. It is the criminality and criminal intent involved in the allocation process by Raja and the alleged violation of the governments Business Transaction Rules that govern crucial financial decisions. Rajas crime is simple. He circumvented rules to favour companies who did not meet the eligibility conditions for the licences. After he adopted the first-come-first-served basis for the allocation of spectrum, Raja advanced the cutoff date for receiving applications by a week from 1 October 2007 to 25 September. This was done allegedly with the specific intent of favouring some firms close to him. This confines the 2G spectrum scandal to Raja alone. It was his decision.

The scope of the scandal gets wider when broader issues like Business Transaction Rules come into the picture. The cabinet decision of 31 October 2003 with which the Department of Telecom concurred in the present case specifies that the DoT and ministry of finance (MoF) would discuss and finalise spectrum pricing formula, which will include incentive for efficient use of spectrum as well as disincentive for sub-optimal usages. According to the report of Justice Shivaraj Patil, which studied the allocations, the spectrum pricing had to be finalised by DoT and MoF as required by the cabinet decision of 2003. The report of the CAG, too, points at the lapse. But bigger than the relevance of the 2003 decision is Rule 4 of the Government of India (Transaction of Business) Rules. Article 77(3) of the Constitution clearly stipulates that any decision which may involve any abandonment of revenue or otherwise have a financial bearing, whether involving expenditure or not, cannot be done without the concurrence of the finance ministry. In case the finance ministry fails to take a position, the issue would be decided by the cabinet. Clearly there are too many loose ends in the governments position here. It has not even come up with a coherent argument on whether Rajas decision was his own or it had the approval of Chidambaram, the finance minister then. It has now come to light that senior officials at the finance ministry were in favour of revising the prices at which spectrum was sold they were sold at 2001 prices and taking the auction route. Did Chidambaram work in tandem with Raja? This gives credence to the oppositions position that the home minister is as much responsible for the 2G mess as Raja is. He did not stop the latter. Under Rule 7 of the Government of India (Transaction of Business) Rules, all the cases specified in the second schedule, which include cases involving financial implications on which the minister of finance desires a decision of the cabinet, and the cases in which a difference of opinion arises between two or more ministers and a cabinet decision is desired, must be brought before the cabinet. Chidambaram, obviously, did not resort to it. Was it finally an act of omission or commission from Chidambaram? That is for the Supreme Court to decide. Getting into numbers and different calculations of the loss figure at this point hints at an effort to distract attention from the core issue. It does not matter whether CAG came up with a number that was fantastic. Rs 2,645 crore would not have lessened the crime in any way.

Chapter: 5

Maxis Mayhem

Was Malaysian govt silent partner in Maxis-Maran deal?

Raman Kirpal Nov 3, 2011

The 2G scam is beginning to create ripples abroad. While that was always likely with companies
ranging from Etisalat to Telenor and Maxis having invested in Indian partners who are now under a cloud of suspicion or in jail for the first time a foreign government has begun to be impacted indirectly. Reason: Maxis group, which is a Malaysia-based group owned by T Ananda Krishnan, and the Malaysian government are partners in Astro, which invested Rs 629 crore in Sun Direct TV, the Maran familys direct-to-home company. If, as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleges, Krishnan paid Rs 550 crore to the Sun TV Group for alleged favours shown by Dayanidhi Maran when he was Communications Minister, by implication the Malaysian governments money has been used for something illegal though it may have been completely unaware of it. The CBI stumbled upon Malaysian government links while investigating Dayanidhi Marans alleged role in forcing C Sivasankaran to sell his stake in Aircel to Maxis Group. It found that Khazanah Nasional, a Malaysian government-run company, owns nearly 40 percent in Astro All Asia Networks. Astro, which is majority-owned by Krishnan, is alleged to have invested in Sun Direct, allegedly as a quid pro quo for favours shown to Maxis in spectrum licences. The Sun TV group is run by Dayanidhi Marans brother Kalanithi. Khazanahs chairman is none other Malaysian Prime Minister Haji Mohammed Najib bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak (or Najib Razak, for short). Given its high stake in Astro, the chairman of Astro is a government appointee former government minister Haji Badri Haji Masri. The situation is tricky for the CBI, which is planning to send a number of letters rogatory (LRs) to Malaysia to seek information on Ananda Krishnans companies and activities. The LRs will be sent on the assumption that the Malaysian government does not know about the details of Ananda Krishnans corporate involvement with the Sun TV Group. But with Ananda Krishnan now becoming an accused in the 2G scam case, it is becoming embarrassing both for him and the Malaysian

government, which is his partner. CBI sources are in the process of sending a formal request to the Malaysian government for information, which, they believe, could set off separate formal investigations against Krishnan for paying the alleged bribe from a company in which the government has a high stake. Khazanah Nasional has listed Astro as one of its industry partners on its website. The website says: Khazanah Nasional is a driving force in shaping selected strategic industries in Malaysia, nurturing their development and doing so with the objective of pursuing the nations long-term economic interests. In its code of ethics, which applies to all its partners, including Astro, Khazanah believes in sustainable business relationships based on the key principles of integrity, accountability, management of conflicts of interests, honest representation, compliance with applicable laws and regulations and gifts policy. In its annual report, Astro says that its wholly-owned subsidiary South Asia Entertainment Holdings Ltd (SAEHL) subscribed to shares in Sun Direct, in which it holds a 20 percent stake. Astros 2010 annual report reads: As on 31 January 2010, the group had invested some INR 5,990 million (Malaysian ringgit 490 million) in Sun Direct TV for a 20 percent equity interest. During the year, the group accounted for INR 1,102 million (RM81 million) for its share of the anticipated start-up losses arising in Sun Direct TV. Its not yet known if Astros chairman and government appointee Haji Badri Haji Masri was aware that some of this investment may have been made for collateral reasons. Astros deputy chairman and group CEO Ralph Marshall, however, knew about the malafide intentions, the CBI claims. He too finds himself listed as an accused in the 2G scam. The CBI, which has named Ananda Krishnan as an accused in its FIR, charges that Sun Direct TV had grossly overvalued its assets. Astro bought a 20 percent stake for Rs 629 crore, while the Maran family paid only Rs 79 crore to buy 80 percent in the company. Thus Astro pumped in an additional Rs 550 crore for favours showered by Dayanidhi Maran. The CBI claims in its FIR that Maran had favoured Maxis Communications by clearing seven spectrum deals and, in return for this favour, Maxis sister concern Astro invested Rs 629 crore at the rate of Rs 69.57 per share. As the CBI readies its formal LR to seek help from the Malaysian judicial and regulatory authorities, it expects the news to impact Malaysian politics. As a near 40 percent owner of Astro, the proportionate part of the quid pro quo amount of Rs 550 crore would be Rs 220 crore. This can, quite legitimately, be considered as use of government funds for unintended purposes and personal gains. Astro could theoretically claim that it had to do some things to gain entry in a foreign market with opaque rules. In fact, its report to shareholders says it faces risks of unexpected changes in laws, regulations, licensing, taxation and other policies, as it invests in foreign ventures and operates overseas. Whether this broad disclosure will cut any ice with the Malaysian government remains to be seen and also whether the CBI manages to prove quid pro quo. The CBI, in its LRs, clearly mentions criminal intent on the part of Ananda Krishnan and Ralph Marshall in investing funds in the Maran familys Sun Direct business.

Damning FIR: CBI says Maran got Rs 550 crore for Maxis favour
Raman Kirpal Oct 12, 2011
549.96 crore) as quid pro quo for various favours to Aircel, owned by Malaysia-based company Maxis, alleges a new First Information Report (FIR) filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the 2G spectrum case early this week. Firstpost has seen the FIR that has been filed.

Former Communications Minister Dayanidhi Maran benefited indirectly by Rs 549,96,01,793 (Rs

The amount of Rs 550 crore (rounded up) was allegedly received by a company owned by Marans brother Kalanithi, and is much larger than the Rs 200 crore allegedly paid to Andimuthu Raja. Raja, who had succeeded Maran in the ministry, is said to have favoured Swan Telecom and the latters promoters had in turn given Rs 200 crore to DMK-controlled Kalaignar TV. DMK chief M Karunanidhis daughter Kanimozhi is in jail for that, though she claims the money was a loan and has since been returned. According to the FIR, on 1 June 2007, a Mumbai-based company Enam Securities Pvt Ltd had determined the valuation of Sun Direct TV, owned by the Maran family, in the range of Rs 3,465.76

crore and Rs 4,039 crore.

The FIR says it was grossly overvalued. In 2007, Tata Sky, with 50 percent of the DTH market, had a fair value of Rs 2,500 crore. Sun Direct TV, which had not even rolled out its DTH services, at best had a value of Rs 400 crore, argues the FIR. The miscalculation in valuation of Sun TV was deliberate, it would seem. Maran had cleared seven licence and spectrum deals with Maxis Communication and, as an equal and fair favour, Maxis sister concern Astro All Asia Networks invested Rs 629 crore at the rate of Rs 69.57 per share, alleges the FIR. Astro bought 20 percent stake in Sun Direct TV. In contrast, Marans brother Kalanithi Maran bought 80 percent equity at the rate of Rs 10 a share. At this rate, Astro was supposed to spend only Rs 79 crore for 20 percent stakes. So calculating the bribe amount on a pro-rata basis, Astro pumped in additional Rs 550 crore for favours showered by Dayanidhi Maran . The FIR begins with a retelling of how Maran had designs to favour Maxis Communications and

how he counselled former Aircel owner C Sivasankaran to sell his 100 percent stake in Aircel to Maxis. According to the report, Maran had malafide intentions in forcing Siva to sell Aircel to T Ananda Krishnan of Maxis. He sat over Sivasankarans applications for spectrum for years by issuing show-cause notices. Despite repeated requests to meet Maran in 2005, the latter declined to meet Siva for ulterior motives. Immediately after, the report says, Ralph Marshall, who is CEO of Maxis Communications, met Sivasankaran and told him to sell his company, as he had already taken all the necessary clearances from the Maran brothers. On 12 November 2005, the FIR says, Kalanithi Maran met Siva in Chennai with his brother Dayanidhis message that Siva should sell his 100 percent stakes in the company and my brother will call you. Things moved very quickly thereafter. The same day (12 November 2005) Maran called Siva, instructing him to work out the deal with Maxis and moments after Siva met Ralph Marshall at Taj Coromandal Hotel, Chennai. Marshall made Siva talk to T Ananda Krishnan on telephone. The deal was struck. Four months later, Astro All Asia Networks through South Asia Entertainment Holding Ltd, invested $166 million (Rs 629 crore, according to the CBI FIR) in Sun Direct TV Private Ltd. Maran allegedly took Rs 550 crore as quid pro quo and rendered a disservice to the nation, the FIR adds. (Click for document)

CBI may have enough on Maran to ask for his arrest

R Jagannathan Oct 10, 2011
ith the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filing a first information report (FIR) against former Communications Minister Dayanidhi Maran, the stage is set for his formal arrest shortly. Maran will be the second former cabinet minister to face arrest after A Raja, who succeeded Maran as communications minister in May 2007. CBI sources, who believe their case against Maran is as strong as, if not stronger than, the one against A Raja, say they have seized several documents from the raids on Marans premises in Delhi and Chennai on Monday. Firstpost has access to some of these documents and the story that emerges is that Maran helped the promoters of Aircel the Malaysian Maxis Group with licences and spectrum for a consideration of around Rs 625 crore. Maran, who was the youngest cabinet minister at 38 when he joined the UPA government in 2004, allegedly pressured C Sivasankaran to sell his stake in Aircel to T Ananda Krishnan, owner of Maxis. Sivasankarans requests for licences and spectrum were delayed to add to the pressure to sell to Maxis. Dayanidhi Maran The CBI first information report mentions Dayanidhi Maran, his brother and Sun TV owner Kalanithi Maran, T Ananda Krishnan, and Astro All Asia Networks CEO Ralph Marshall. The agency has already sent a Letter Rogatory (a judicial request for help on information from another country) to Malaysia to ascertain the details of Maxis Communications ownership structure and for information on the groups other companies, including Astro All Asia Networks. The following, according to the CBI, is the chronology of the conspiracy allegedly hatched by Dayanidhi Maran: C Sivasankaran, who earlier owned Aircel (then known as Dishnet Wireless Ltd), had applied for spectrum in 2004 and 2005 for six circles See document. Maran choked Sivasankaran by sitting over his applications for nearly two years and thus forced him to sell Aircel to Malaysia-based Maxis Group. On 23 February 2006, the UPA government set up a Group of Ministers and authorised it to de-

cide on the pricing of spectrum. Five days later, on 28 February 2006, Maran wrote to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh strongly objecting to GoMs power to decide on the spectrum pricing issue. He said GoM should focus its efforts on getting defence to vacate spectrum, and pricing should be left to his ministry. See documents In November 2006, when Aircel was with T Ananda Krishnan, Maran released spectrum to Aircel. On 5 April 2007 before Maran left the communications ministry a Maxis Group media company, Astro All Asia Networks, through South Asia Entertainment Holding Ltd, invested US $166 million (Rs 625 crore) in Sun Direct TV Private Ltd owned by Dayanidhi Marans brother Kalanithi Maran. Maxis Group invested Rs 625 crore for a 20 percent stake in Sun Direct, when Kalanithi allocated 80 percent of the shares to himself at just Rs 10 per share. At the price at which Maxis bought its Sun Direct stake, the company was being valued at Rs 2,700 crore when it had not even rolled out its direct-to-home services. Tata Sky and Dish TV, which had over 15 lakh subscribers each and a 50:50 share of the DTH market, were valued at much less than Rs 2,700 crore. CBI thinks Sun Direct TV overvalued itself to camouflage the consideration received from Maxis Group. In its quarterly report, Astro All Asia Networks said: Sun Direct TV, the DTH joint-venture in India, is on track for a service rollout by end 2007/early 2008. Typical of similar start-ups, the business is expected to incur losses The group expects to account for its share of Sun Direct TV losses of up to US $166 million representing its 20 per cent equity stake, over a period of five years. See document 1 and See document 2. Maxis Group also invested Rs 100 crore in Sun FM Radio Network and acquired a minority stake of 20 percent. Aircel had only two telecom licences till 2004, but by 2006 it sold licences and spectrum at 2001 prices in 21 more circles, making it a pan-India operator. The licence period of Aircel for Chennai Circle was also extended without any fee. Aircel benefited through the allotment of excess spectrum of 3.6 MHz, which was beyond the upper limit laid down in the Unified Access Service Licence (UASL), which, according to the Comptroller of Auditor General, caused a loss to the public exchequer of Rs 75 crore. Maran served as communications minister for three years. He fell out of favour with his grand uncle, DMK supremo M Karunanidhi, in May 2007 and was forced to resign. His place was taken by Andimuthu Raja, now in jail. However, by 2009, the relationship with Karunanidhi had been mended, and Maran returned to the Union cabinet as textiles minister. He was forced to resign again in the wake of the CBIs investigations against him in the 2G spectrum scam. Marans tenure as communications minister was notable for dropping call rates and the decision to raise the foreign direct investment limit to 74 percent. But it also set the stage for possible spectrum scandals later. Initial CBI investigations suggest that 2G spectrum money worth Rs 1,000 crore may have been traded during Marans term. During his tenure, Maran allocated over 70 bits of spectrum to GSM

(Global System of Mobile) operators. Sivasankaran launched the Aircel brand in Tamil Nadu after he bought over RPG Cellular in Tamil Nadu and cornered over 2.2 million subscribers in quick time. A Raja That was just four months before Maran came in as communications minister. Marans antagonism to Sivasankaran is traced to the time when he aligned himself with the Tata group, which had a tieup with Rupert Murdochs direct-to-home project, Tata Sky. The latter was in direct competition with the Sun Network owned by Kalanithi Maran, and had already got a head start over Sun Direct in DTH. The CBI believes that Maran targeted the Tatas and Aircel immediately after he took over as minister. Though Siva was known for launching new projects and then selling them for a big gain, his sudden exit from Aircel caught the CBIs eye. A year after Maran took over, Sivasankaran sold his stake to Maxis Communications and the Reddys of the Apollo Group of Hospitals for Rs 4,700 crore. Reddy came close to the Maran family in 2000, when Dayanidhis father Murasoli Maran was miraculously saved from a rare cardiac condition, hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy, by the Chennai Apollo Hospital. I have got my life back. I am really proud of this world-class institution, said the senior Maran on the day he was discharged after a 34-day stay in the hospital. Maxis, which holds a 74 percent stake in the Aircel group, also has a sizeable investment in Sun Network thorough its sister concern Astro. Apollos Dr Pratap C Reddy and his family theoretically control 26 percent in Aircel but Maxis is probably the real beneficial owner of the bulk of the Reddy stake. In 2004, when the Tatas joined hands with Sivasankarans Dishnet Wireless Ltd (now Aircel), Dishnet sought more UASL licences. The then telecom secretary had endorsed the application, but Marans office put up a note demanding details that were vague and irrelevant, according to the Justice Shivraj V Patil Committee. The committees mandate was to look into procedural lapses during 2001-09 in the communications ministry. But once Siva was out, the Marans cleared spectrum for Dishnet Wireless in Kolkata within a day. Dishnet had a cellular service in West Bengal, but it did not have enough spectrum. On 4 April 2007, a proposal was put up for the allocation of spectrum, and Telecom Secretary DS Mathur cleared the proposal within a day with the noting that the matter had been discussed with the minister.

The Justice Patil Committee report faulted the functioning of Maran during his tenure from May 2004 to May 2007. The report says Maran did not consult the Telecom Commission and ignored the Group of Ministers (GoM) while taking crucial policy decisions. Actions during Mr Marans tenure fell foul of the procedures laid down in the government of India (Transactions of Business) Rules, which stipulate that when a policy has any financial bearing, no orders shall be issued without the concurrence of the finance ministry. The minister deviated from extant policy by not discussing the issue of determining the entry fee for telecom licence with the finance ministry, the report reads. Its another matter, that neither P Chidambaram, the then finance minister, and the PMO, enforced the same business transaction rules. Maran, like his successor Raja, effectively ran his own spectrum policy by violating the business transaction rules. His sins may be catching up on him now.

Maxis owns effective 99% of Aircel through Suneeta Reddy

Raman Kirpal Sep 16, 2011

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has stumbled upon a new possible irregularity in the

shareholding structure of Aircel, an all-India mobile services operator owned by Malaysian entrepreneur T Ananda Krishnans Maxis Group. While the CBI is checking to see if Maxis was shown any special favours by the then Communications Minister Dayanidhi Maran, it now appears as if Maxis is an indirect owner of the nearly 99 percent of Aircel. Telecom regulations do not allow foreign parties to own more than 74 percent in Indian mobile phone companies. While investigating C Sivasankarans allegation that Maran pressured him to sell his stake in Aircel to Maxis, the CBI stumbled upon the real shareholding pattern of Aircel. While 65 percent of the equity is held by Maxis directly, the balance 35 percent is held by Deccan Digital, in which Maxis (through subsidiaries) has 26 percent and Sindya Securities & Investment Pvt Ltd 74 percent. Sindya belongs to P Dwarakanath Reddy and Suneeta Reddy , who is Joint Managing Director of the Apollo Hospitals Group. With this equity structure, Maxis gets an effective 74 percent holding in Aircel (65 percent directly, and an effective 9 percent through Deccan). But heres the dicey part. While Sindhya paid Rs 34.17 crore for its 74 percent equity stake in Deccan, Maxis paid Rs 11.82 crore for the equity and also invested Rs 1,664 in the preference capital of Deccan. In short, the total investment of the Maxis Group in Aircel is a whopping Rs 7,880.8 crore against just Rs 34.17 crore by Sindya. According to CBI sources, this investment break-up suggests that Sindya is just a front for Maxis and hence needs to be investigated further by the enforcement directorate for possible Foreign Exchange Management Act violations. CBI had questioned Suneeta Reddy early this week to find links between T Ananda Krishnan, the Reddy family and Dayanidhi Maran. Firstpost has requested Suneeta Reddy for her version of events by email, but did not receive any reply at the time of writing.

Interestingly, Ananda Krishnan, a Malaysian businessman of Sri Lankan Tamil origin, did not hide his 99 percent ownership from the Malasiyan stock exchange, Bursa Malaysia, in a March 2006 filing. Krishnan said: With equity interest of 74 percent in Aircel and 100 percent subscription of cumulative redeemable non-convertible preference shares in Deccan Digital, this effectively gives the group 99.3 percent economic returns from the investment in Aircel. CBI is in the process of acquiring all the concerned documents from Malaysia. The Telecommunication Ministry under Dayanidhi Maran allotted 2G spectrum to Aircel in 14 circles without verifying the holding structure of Aircel. In 2004, Aircel existed only in two circles Chennai Metro circle and Tamil Nadu circle. C Sivasankaran, then the owner of Aircel, had applied for Unified Access Service Licence (UASL) 13 times, but Maran raised objections and issued show cause notices on various pretexts. Maran began allotting telecom circle licences only after T Ananda Krishnan of the Maxis Group became the majority owner of Aircel. On 16 May 2006, Dayanidhi Marans ministry delinked all the show-cause notices served on Aircel in the past and initiated a process to allot spectrum to Aircel under Ananda Krishnan. Withing nine days (between 20 and 29 November), Aircel became the eighth largest telecom company in the country, as Maran cleared all the pending requests for UASLs to Aircel. Firstpost had earlier reported that Krishnan had reciprocated favours received from Dayanidhi Maran by investing Rs 725 crore in the Maran familys companies Sun TV Group. Krishnans Group company South Asia Entertainment Holding Ltd. (SAEHL) invested Rs 625 crore in Sun Direct for a 20 percent state in the company. And Maran family had invested Rs 12.6 crore to own the remaining stake (80 percent). Besides, Maxis had invested Rs 100 crore in Sun FM Radio Network and acquired a minority stake of 20 percent.

Chapter: 6

The Backstory

2G Scam: A comprehensive timeline

PTI Oct 22, 2011

New Delhi: Following is the chronology of the events related to the 2G spectrum allocation scam
case in which former Telecom Minister A Raja is the main accused: May, 2007: A Raja takes over as Telecom Minister. Aug, 2007: Process of allotment of 2G spectrum for telecom along with Universal Access Service (UAS) Licences initiated by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT). Sept 25, 2007: Telecom Ministry issues press note fixing deadline for application as October 1, 2007. Oct 1, 2007: DoT receives 575 applications for UAS licences of 46 companies. Nov 2, 2007: The Prime Minister writes to Raja directing him to ensure allotment of 2G spectrum in a fair and transparent manner and to ensure that licence fee was properly revised. Raja writes back to the Prime Minister rejecting many of his recommendations. Nov 22, 2007: Finance Ministry writes to DoT raising concerns over the procedure adopted by it. Demand for review rejected. Jan 10, 2008: DoT decides to issue licences on first-come-first-serve basis, preponing the cut-off date to September 25, from October 1, 2007. Later on the same day, DoT posted an announcement on its website saying those who apply between 3.30 pm and 4.30 pm would be issued licences in accord-

ance with the said policy. 2008: Swan Telecom, Unitech and Tata Teleservices sell off a part of their stakes at much higher rates to Etisalat, Telenor and DoCoMo, respectively. May 4, 2009: An NGO Telecom Watchdog files complaint to the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) on the illegalities in the spectrum allocation to Loop Telecom. May 19, 2009: Another complaint was filed to the CVC by Arun Agarwal, highlighting grant of spectrum to Swan Telecom at throwaway prices. 2009: CVC directs CBI to investigate the irregularities in allocation of 2G spectrum. July 1, 2009: Delhi HC holds advancing of cut-off date as illegal on a petition of telecom company S-Tel. Oct 21, 2009: CBI registers a case and files an FIR against unknown officers of DoT and unknown private persons/companies under various provisions of IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act. Oct 22, 2009: CBI raids DoT offices. Nov 16, 2009: CBI seeks details of tapped conversation of corporate lobbyist Niira Radia to find out involvement of middlemen in the grant of spectrum to telecom companies. Mar 31, 2010: CAG says that there was large scale irregularities in the spectrum allocation. Apr 2, 2010: CBI DIG Vineet Agarwal and DG I-T Milap Jain, who were investigating the case, transferred. May 6, 2010: Telephonic conversation between Raja and Niira Radia made public by the media. May, 2010: NGO Centre for Public Interest litigation moves the Delhi High Court seeking investigation into the scam by SIT or CBI. May 25, 2010: Delhi HC dismisses the petition. Aug, 2010: Appeal filed in the Supreme Court against the High Courts order. Aug 18, 2010: HC refuses to direct the Prime Minister to decide on a complaint by Janata Party chief Swamy seeking sanction to prosecute Raja for his involvement in 2G scam. Sept 13, 2010: SC asks government, Raja to reply within 10 days to three petitions filed by CPIL and others alleging there was a Rs 70,000 crore scam in the grant of telecom licences in 2008. Sept 24, 2010: Swamy moves SC seeking direction to the PM to sanction prosecution of Raja. Sept 27, 2010: Enforcement Directorate informs SC of probe against firms suspected to have violated FEMA. Says cant deny or confirm now Rajas involvement in the scam. Oct 8, 2010: SC asks government to respond to CAG report about the scam. Oct 21, 2010: Draft reports of CAG placed before the Supreme Court.

Oct 29, 2010: SC pulls up CBI for its tardy progress in the investigations into the scam. Nov 10, 2010: CAG submits report on 2G spectrum to government stating loss of Rs 1.76 lakh crore to exchequer. Nov 11, 2010: DoT files affidavit in SC saying CAG did not have the authority to question the policy decision as per which licence were issued to new players in 2008. Nov 14, 2010: Raja resigns as Telecom Minister Nov 15, 2010: Kapil Sibal given additional charge of Telecom Ministry. Nov 20, 2010: Affidavit on behalf of PM filed in Supreme Court. Rejects charge of inaction on Swamys complaint. Nov 22, 2010: CBI tells SC it will file charge sheet in the case within three months. Nov 22, 2010: CBI tells SC role of corporate lobbyist Niira Radia would be questioned by it. Nov 24, 2010: SC reserves verdict on Swamys plea seeking direction to PM for grant of sanction to prosecute Raja. Nov 25, 2010: SC ticks off CBI for not questioning Raja. Nov 29, 2010: CBI files status report on 2G spectrum scam probe. Nov 30, 2010: SC questions CVC P J Thomass moral right to supervise CBIs probe into 2G spectrum scam as he himself was Telecom Secretary at that point of time. Dec 1, 2010: SC directs original tapes containing conversation between corporate lobbyist Niira Radia and others be handed over to it. Dec 1, 2010: Raja questions CAG findings in the SC. Dec 2, 2010: Government places recorded tapes in the SC. Dec 2, 2010: SC comes down heavily on Raja for bypassing and overruling PMs advice to defer allocation of 2G spectrum by a few days. Dec 8, 2010: SC favours including in the probe period since 2001 when first-come-first-serve was the norm for spectrum allocation. Dec 8, 2010: SC asks Centre to consider setting up of a special court to try 2G spectrum scam

case. Dec 8, 2010: ED submits report. Says money trail covers 10 countries, including Mauritius. Dec 14, 2010: Another PIL in SC seeking cancellation of new telecom licences and 2G spectrum allocated during Rajas tenure. Dec 15, 2010: Swamy files petition in a Delhi court seeking his inclusion as a public prosecutor in 2G spectrum case. Dec 15, 2010: Swamy mentions in complaint that Raja favoured ineligible private companies Swan Telecom Pvt Ltd and Unitech Wireless Ltd in allocating the spectrum. Jan 4, 2011: Swamy moves SC seeking cancellation of 2G spectrum licences. Jan 10, 2011: Supreme Court issues notice to Centre on the plea seeking cancellation of 2G licenses. Also issues notices to 11 companies which allegedly did not fulfill the roll-out obligations or were ineligible. Jan 30, 2011: Governments decision to regularise licences of the companies which failed to meet the deadline for roll-out obligation challenged in the Supreme Court. Feb 2, 2011: Raja, former Telecom Secretary Siddartha Behura and Rajas former Personal Secretary R K Chandolia arrested and next day they were remanded in CBI custody. Feb 8, 2011: Raja remanded to two more days of CBI custody. Behura and Chandolia sent to judicial custody. Feb 8, 2011: Shahid Usman Balwa, promoter of Swan Telecom, arrested by CBI. Feb 10, 2011: SC asks the CBI to bring under its scanner corporate houses which were beneficiaries of the 2G spectrum. Raja remanded to CBI custody for four more days by a special CBI court along with Balwa. Feb 14, 2011: Rajas CBI custody extended for three more days. Balwas custody extended for four days. Feb 17, 2011: Raja sent to Tihar Jail under judicial custody. Feb 18, 2011: Balwa sent to judicial custody. Feb 24, 2011: CBI tells a Delhi court that Balwa facilitated transaction to Kalaignar TV. Feb 28, 2011: Raja seeks judicial proceedings through video conferencing stating that he faces threat to life from fellow prisoners. Mar 1, 2011: CBI tells SC that 63 persons are under scanner. Raja allowed by CBI court to appear before it via video-conferencing. Mar 14, 2011: The Delhi High Court sets up special court to deal exclusively with 2G cases. Balwa also allowed to appear via video-conferencing. Mar 29, 2011: SC permits CBI to file charge sheet on April 2 instead of March 31. Two more per-

sons Asif Balwa and Rajeev Agarwal arrested. Apr 2, 2011: The CBI files its first charge sheet in the 2G spectrum allocation scam. Apr 25, 2011: CBI files second charge sheet and court issues summons to Kanimozhi, Sharad Kumar and Karim Morani taking congizance of the charge sheet. May 6, 2011: Kanimozhi and Sharad Kumar appears before court and files bail pleas while Morani sought exemption from appearance on medical ground. May 7, 2011: Court reserves order on Kanimozhi and Sharad Kumars bail applications. May 14, 2011: Court defers order on their bail pleas for May 20. May 20, 2011: Court rejects bail pleas of Kanimozhi and Sharad Kumar and orders their forthwith arrest. June 20, 2011: SC rejects Kanimozhis bail plea July 25, 2011: Arguments on Charge begins. Raja seeks to make Prime Minister and former finance minister P Chidambaram as witness. Sept 22, 2011: CBI defends Chidambaram in SC, blames DoT for all wrongs. Sept 26, 2011: CBI moves plea for framing fresh charge for criminal breach of trust against Raja, Chandolia and Behura. Sept 29, 2011: CBI says role of Anil Ambani being probed, gives a virtual clean chit to Tata and Videocon group. Oct 9, 2011: CBI files FIR against Maran and his brother. Oct 22, 2011: Court finds prima facie evidence to put on trial all 17 accused including Raja on various counts like criminal conspiracy, breach of trust, cheating and forgery.

2Gs Dabangg man- Prashant Bhushan

Meenal Dubey May 10, 2011
the rich and the mighty. In real life though, there are few like the Delhi-based lawyer and activist Prashant Bhushan. He is fighting a crucial public interest litigation (PIL) in the 2G spectrum allocation case. An outcome in his favour, many powerful people will see the insides of a jail for the first time in their lives. If you ask anyone in Delhis legal circles about Prashant Bhushan, they will tell you one thing The man means business and if you are on the wrong side of the law, then he will come after you. The name Bhushan is synonymous with fear for corrupt judges, politicians, bureaucrats and now corporate honchos, says a top Supreme Court lawyer. Unlike many well-heeled lawyers of the Supreme Court, Bhushan is known to have turned down fees worth crores and remuneration like large tracts of land for defending a guilty person. If he has taken up your case, then it means that he is convinced of your innocence and will fight tooth and nail to prove it, the lawyer adds. His contemporaries also acknowledge that Bhushan refused to charge a penny for the needy and won their cases. A former alumnus from St. Josephs College Allahabad, he joined IIT, Madras, in 1973. However, he left a year later and pursued a BA programme with Philosophy, Economics and Political Science. Thereafter, he went to Princeton University and completed his Masters in Philosophy in 1982. A year later, he returned to India and enrolled as an advocate. Bhushan has worked on 500 public interest litigations (PIL) in a career span of 15 years and the figure has only grown over the last few years. Many say that he has inherited this streak for justice from his renowned father and Indias former law minister Shanti Bhushan, who has been named on the panel for the Jan Lokpal Bill. Many high-profile cases have seen the appearance of Bhushan. These include the Niira Radia tapes, Narmada Bachao Andolan, Bofors, the contempt of court case against Arundhati Roy, Enron, the Right to Information Act, and the oil companies disinvestment case.

Bollywood often churns out stories of a middle class hero taking up cudgels fearlessly against

At a time when PILs are filed on anything from the name of a Bollywood film to a serious cause, his principles and upright approach to law have earned him the formidable reputation of a man not to be taken lightly. I think the general public is fed up of the corruption and the callousness of our enforcement agencies and politicians who are a part of it, he said. He argues that there is no need for fear if one is on the right side of law. With the spotlight on him after his petition demanding the prosecution of the likes of Ratan Tata, Anil Ambani, and Sharad Pawar in the 2G scam, he appears remarkably cool and collected. I will never ask the government for protection because I know that the accused can only try to malign my reputation. They will not harm me, Bhushan assures. An avid badminton player, Bhushan does not get too much time for watching sports on television but he likes to indulge himself in an occasional Bollywood or Hollywood flick. Unlike other rich and powerful lawyers, Bhushan prefers to keep a low profile. He avoids glitzy parties and is most comfortable in his non-branded regular clothes and shoes. Post the 2G spectrum case, Bhushans primary preoccupation is the Jan Lokpal Bill. While he would like to holiday with wife and sons for the summer break, he knows there will be no holiday this year. But then, no regrets, comes the cheerful reply.

How CBI pulled the rug under Raja on spectrum loss issue
Raman Kirpal Nov 3, 2011

If Andimuthu Raja had any hopes of getting bail on the plea that his spectrum sales did not in-

volve any losses, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has cleverly squashed all hopes in this regard. Reason: it has not used the revenue loss argument anywhere while framing charges against Raja and his other co-accused. Instead, the core of the CBI accusation is that Raja unduly favoured Unitech Wireless Ltd, Reliance Telecom and Swan Telecom. In short, even though the big ruckus at the Joint Parliamentary Committee or the Public Accounts Committee or the law ministry, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) or the Comptroller and Auditor General is the quantum of revenue loss from selling spectrum at 2001 prices, none of this confusion will help Raja. Kapil Sibals famous zeroloss statement will remain just that: theory with no impact on the culpability of Raja or business tycoons in the 2G scam. A Raja It was on hopes of cashing in on the zero-loss theory that Raja claimed in the trial court that since there was no loss, he should not be kept in jail. The CBI, however, sidestepped Rajas ruse by framing charges that had nothing to do with losses. The key charges framed are: Raja unduly favoured two ineligible companies Unitech and Swan through a conspiracy along with his officers to allocate them licences and spectrum. Unitech and Swan sold off a part of their spectrum at a hefty premium even before they had rolled out services. Thus, Rajas undue favour led them to earn Rs 7,105 crore through the sale. Raja sold off spectrum at 2001 prices despite warnings from the Member, Telecom (Finance) Madhu Madhavan and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Raja and Kanimozhi Karunanidhi were in regular touch to pursue pending works of Kalaignar TV.

 Raja not only helped Kanimozhi register Kalaignar TV with the ministry of information and broadcasting, but also the Tata Sky bouquet of channels. Kanimozhi was the active brain behind the operations of Kalaignar TV and thus the amount of Rs 200 crore paid by Dynamix Realty to Kalaignar TV through Kusegaon Fruits and Vegetables Pvt Ltd and Cineyug Films Pvt Ltd was not a genuine business transaction. It was illegal gratification in lieu of favours showered by Raja on Swan Telecom. If the transaction of Rs 200 crore was in the nature of a loan, as claimed by Kanimozhi subsequently, it was a valuable thing for a consideration which is not known. Thus, the charges framed against all the accused go on to mention the minute details of the criminal conspiracy, cheating, fraud and criminal breach of trust, but the charges do not anywhere deal with the losses caused in selling 2G spectrum cheaply. Raja will thus have no reason to rake up the controversial loss issue in his favour when the trial begins on 11 November. Read the order given by the designated CBI court when the charges were framed against A Raja, Kanimozhi and others.

2G scam: Raja, 16 others charged with criminal breach of trust

FP Staff Oct 22, 2011

2G order is a milestone: Shahid Balwas lawyer

1:15 pm Meanwhile Shahid Balwas lawyer Majid Menon said in a matter os such importance it was necessary for the court to explain each accusation. He said the court has given the accused some time to glance through the order and sign the plea of non guilty. The court wanted to frame the charges today itself but all the accused said they need time to go through the over 700-page order on charges to be framed later. Delhi court finds prima facie evidence against all 17 accused, including former Telecom Minister A Raja, in 2G case. 12.30 pm: All of accused are now charged with section 120 B, which deals with criminal conspiracy. Kanimozhi charged with section 120 B which deals with punishment for criminal conspiracy which also carries a possible imprisonment term. Raja also charged with section 420, 468 and 479. A Raja and Kanimozhi also charged under the anti-corruption act. Morani and Goenka charged under 192. A special CBI Court has upheld CBIs contention and has charged all 17 accused, including Kanimozhi and A Raja under criminal breach of trust. Trial will go on under section 409. If convicted, those accused can face a minimum of 7 years imprisonment and a a maximum of life sentence. Besides this Raja and other public servants have been charged with misuse of official position punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Each accused, particularly Kanomozhi were hopeful to get bails after the charged are framed. But Section 409, however, dashes their hopes. Only possible hope is now to appeal in the High Court. Meanwhile, telecom companies Reliance Telecom Ltd, Swan Telecom and Unitech Wireless charged with criminal conspiracy and faulty implementation of documents and violating corporate law in the case. Also Shahid Balwa and Rajeev Agarwal have also been charged with fabricating false evidence. Nature of charges Section 409, which is criminal conspiracy and means conviction of life sentence, has been upheld by the Special Court for 14 of the 17 accused.

In addition, the court said there was evidence for framing of charges against Raja, Behura and Chandolia under section 409 of the IPC for the offence of breach of trust against them which attracts maximum punishment of life term. With an important milestone crossed in the case, the ccused can now now move for bail as observed by the Supreme Court during the hearing of bail petition by Kanimozhi earlier. Special CBI Judge O P Saini said evidence is there for framing of charges against telecom firms Reliance Telecom Ltd, Swan Telecom and Unitech (Tamil Nadu) Wireless Ltd. The judge also said CBI has also brought evidence to frame charges against corporate executives of Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani groups Managing Director Gautam Doshi, Surendra Pipara, Groups President and Hari Nair, senior Vice President. Others against whom charges will be framed are Swan Telecom promoter Shahid Usman Balwa, his cousin Asif Balwa, their colleague Rajeev Agarwal, Unitech Ltds MD Sanjay Chandra and DB Realty MD Vinod Goenka. The judge said there was prima facie evidence for framing charges also against Kalaignar TVs MD Sharad Kumar and Bollywood filmmaker Karim Morani. 11:37 am : Proceedings have begun and Karunanidhi has reached the Patiala high court ahead of 2G order. 11:00 am All the accused have reached the court, and the framing of charges has been differed by another 30 minutes. The 17 accused will be ussered into the court room as of now. Meanwhile DMK chief Karunanidhi, Dayanidhi Maran are meeting Sonia Gandhi at her Delhi residence. Karunanidhi has not met Sonia Gandhi since his daughter Kanimozhi was arrested and since he lost the elections in Tamil Nadu. The denial of bail is the fundamental focus point of DMKs argument in the 2G scam case. Karunanidhi, however, refused to meet Sonia Gandhi during his last visit to Delhi. A special CBI court in Delhi is likely to frame charges on Saturday against 17 people accused in the 2G spectrum allocation scam including former telecom minister A Raja and DMK MP Kanimozhi. Meanwhile DMK chief MK Karunanidhi has arrived in Delhi ahead of the hearing and he is likely to meet the UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi. Special Judge OP Saini will decide whether the accused will be charged under criminal breach of trust or not. If tried under the above and found guilty of the same, then the maximum conviction is a life sentence. The CBI filed its first chargesheet seven months ago, where former Telecom minister A Raja was accused of being the mastermind of the 2g scam. He was arrested on February 2. The CBI also named some of the biggest corporate executives and companies in the country which includes former Telecom Ministry officials, Anil Ambani owned ADAG group officials, Kalaignar TVS Sharad Kumar, Shahid Balwa of Swan Telecom, Unitechs Sanjay Chandra and DB Realty MD Vinod Goenka. The 17 accused in the 2G spectrum allocation scam case are: A Raja, Siddharth Behura, RK Chandolia, Gautam Doshi, Surrendra Pipara, Hari Nair, Sanjay Chandra, Shahid Balwa, Vinod Goenka, Sharat Kumar, Kanimozhi, Rajiv Agarwal, Asif Balwa, Karim Morani, Reliance Telecommunication, Unitech Wireless Pvt Ltd (Tamil Nadu) and Swan Telecom.

2G scam: What are the exact charges under section 409?

FP Staff Oct 22, 2011
nal Code(CrPC) and section 120 B of the IPC . However all accused are not public servants and the majority are corporate executives. The 17 accused in the 2G spectrum allocation scam case are: A Raja, Siddharth Behura, RK Chandolia, Gautam Doshi, Surrendra Pipara, Hari Nair, Sanjay Chandra, Shahid Balwa, Vinod Goenka, Sharat Kumar, Kanimozhi, Rajiv Agarwal, Asif Balwa, Karim Morani, Reliance Telecommunication, Unitech Wireless Pvt Ltd (Tamil Nadu) and Swan Telecom. Section 409, which is criminal conspiracy and means conviction of life sentence, has been upheld by the Special Court for 14 of the 17 accused. Section 409 has exclusively been charged on the public servants which includes the A Raja, former Telecom secretary, Siddharth Behura and Rajas close aide RK Chandolia. Section 409 deals with criminal conspiracy and is meant for public servants. However, the corporate executives have also been read with 409, which means they are seen as being part of the conspiracy but are not being seen as playing a substantive part in that conspiracy. The accused corporate executives have been charged under section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, which is for criminal conspiracy and states the following: rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where no express provision is made in this Code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if he had abetted such offence. However, since all the accused have been charged with Section 120 B, they are all bound by whatever sentence is announced. But because Raja, Kanimozhi, Behura and Chandolia are public servants they could possibly face harsher sentences. The public servants are the ones actually accused of committing the concerned criminal act. Watch Video

All the accused in the 2G spectrum case have been charged under section 409 of the Criminal Pe-

2G scam: Who said what in this tale of twists and turns

FP Staff Sep 30, 2011

The 2G Spectrum scam seems to be like a hurricane of sorts, one that the UPA didnt quite see

coming. At first it seemed that only the DMK and its party men would face the music but as the drama has unfolded in the last couple of weeks, the Congress too has not been spared. Senior members of the Congress appear to be blaming each other. Add to that there is a growing belief that the 2G scam took place with the full knowledge of the Prime Ministers Office, an idea that is very damaging to the tattered image of the UPA and the Congress. But as with all scandals, there is a need for public defense and what we find are unique statements that seem to differ from the ones made before. And since the 2G case has far too many people involved in it, the number of accusations and counter-accusations is rather high. Name calling is inevitable in any major scandal and this one is no exception. From Mr Subramaniam Swamy, one of the petitioners in the 2G case, commenting on the Finance Ministers recent statement that the note does not reflect his personal views to the main opposition party BJP which sees a clever political opportunity in this scandal, everyone is in a mood to ensure that their voice and opinion is heard. The curse of the 24X7 news media is this, there are just too many statements floating around frankly its hard to keep track of who said what. Rajas defence is forgotten as the centre of attention shifts on to Chidambaram and co. So here in our slideshow today, weve put together a bunch of statements by the key people involved in the scam to give a clearer sense of where everybody stands currently in this whole mess. Our slideshow starts with statements made by A Raja while defending himself in court, followed by Kanimozhi who is also in jail and then goes on to the current controversy regarding the Finance Ministry note.

Scan QR code or click to download our iPad / iPhone app

iPad

iPhone

Copyright 2011 Firstpost All rights reserved Copyright Network18. All rights reserved.