The scam that wasn't: 2G verdict lambasts CBI and ED for 'artfully arranging a few facts'

The acquittal of all 2G scam accused by trial court is grossly wrong&sends a signal that influential people are not accountable in this country's judicial system.There was considerable evidence of Benami licences,fixing of the 1st Come 1st served system&also bribes in this. Shame

— Prashant Bhushan (@pbhushan1) December 21, 2017

Bhushan was also the part of the hugely popular Anna Hazare-led anti-corruption movement which swayed the popular mood against the ‘corrupt’ UPA II government.

The scam that toppled a govt

The high-profile list of accused in the scam included former telecom minister A Raja, DMK leader and MP A Kanimozhi, Karunanidhi's wife Dayalu Ammal, former telecom secretary Siddharth Behuria; RK Chandolia, the private secretary to A Raja; Shahid Balwa of Swan Telecom; Unitech executive Sanjay Chandra; Gautam Doshi, Hari Nair and Surendra Pipara of Anil Ambani owned ADAG and other businessman including, Karim Morani, Asif Balwa, Rajiv Agarwal and Sharath Kumar, Ravi Ruia, Anshuman Ruia, Vikash Saraf of Essar, IP Khaitan and Kiran Khaitan of Loop Telecom.

In what became one of the most sensational cases in recent times, it was alleged that Raja, along with other officials, had conspired to change the policy of spectrum auction to a 'first come, first serve' basis and that huge sums of money exchanged hands.

What set off the case was a November 2010 CAG report on “issue of licences and allocation of spectrum” which claimed ineligible applicants were granted licence at prices far below the market rate. Then the CVC, acting on the report, had asked the CBI to investigate the matter. The ED, too, started investigations into issues of money laundering arising out of the alleged kickbacks

The trial court in October 2011 framed charges under various acts including the the Prevention of Corruption Act dealing with offences of criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery, abuse of official position, criminal misconduct, and bribery by public servants.

In its charge sheet, the CBI had alleged a loss of Rs 30,984 crore in allocation of 122 licences. These licenses were later scrapped by the by the Supreme Court which then decided to monitor the investigations.

The ED too had filed a prosecution complaint naming former telecom minister Raja, Kanimozhi and others for alleged money laundering.

A criminal conspiracy

Meanwhile, in the order, the CBI judge says that the apex investigating agency has failed to prove Raja, along with officials from companies that won the licenses was part of a criminal conspiracy to receive kickbacks from the allocation of licenses.

Coming harshly on the prosecution, the judge says “In the beginning, the prosecution started with the case with great enthusiasm and ardour. However, as the case progressed, it became highly cautious and guarded in its attitude making it difficult to find out as to what prosecution wanted to prove.”

Anand Grover was the prosecutor in the case. “By the end, the quality of prosecution totally deteriorated and it became directionless and diffident,” the judge notes.

“I may also add that for the last about seven years, on all working days, summer vacation included, I religiously sat in the open Court from 10 AM to 5 PM, awaiting for someone with some legally admissible evidence in his possession, but all in vain. Not a single soul turned up.” He further says “This indicates that everybody was going by public perception created by rumour, gossip and speculation. However, public perception has no place in judicial proceedings.”

The court also set aside charges of money laundering. “In view of acquittal of accused in the case relating to schedule offence, there are no “proceeds of crime”. “Proceeds of crime” is the foundational fact for the offence of money-laundering. Since there are no “proceeds of crime”, there can be no of..of money-laundering, as nothing remains to be laundered. Thus, the very base of the instant case is gone and the alleged offence stands wiped out.” the order says.

Meanwhile, with their reputation at stake, the ED and the CBI are set to challenge the verdict. The ED has questioned the verdict on how evidence which was appreciated by the Supreme Court has been set aside by the trial court and how the latter framed the charges without appreciating the evidence in the first place.

The case is clearly set to remain a burning issue for a long time.