New Delhi: The The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Monday told the Supreme Court that it will complete investigation and file within three months a chargesheet in the 2G spectrum allocation case.
The apex court was informed by CBI counsel and senior advocate K. K. Venugopal that the agency will take two months to complete the investigation and in another one month, it will arrive at a conclusion and file the chargesheet. Dravida Munnettra Kazhagam (DMK) leader A. Raja had resigned as telecom minister earlier this month in the wake of the spectrum scam.
“We are investigating the offences and for each charge there has to be evidence and documents. The CAG report is about financial impropriety and not a criminal act,” Venugopal told a bench of justice G. S. Singhvi and A. K. Ganguly, adding that only after the probe it could be said whether “we have done our work properly or not.”
He said that the CBI will take two months time to finish the investigation as it was examining transcripts relating to 5,000 calls (out of which 3,800 have been analysed), 6,000 files and 80,000 pages of documents.
All these are being scrutinized, the senior advocate, who is representing the CBI from today, said.
He further said since the matter was being examined by the CBI, the apex court should not go into the merits of the case.
Venugopal said that the NGO, Central for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), the main petitioner in the case, has sought monitoring of the investigation by the apex court.
Venugopal said he would like to place two positions in law about the monitoring of the investigation by the court and this he would do by placing 15 or 16 judgements before it.
“Their is no need to go into the merits of the investigation. I will place judgements so that you (court) can proceed in the case whether the monitoring is mandatory or not,” he said.
In the course of the arguments, the bench said, “We are also conscious of the scope of judicial limitations but we always decide after hearing arguments. We have so far taken note of this fact.”
Meanwhile, advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for CPIL, maintained that the court can go into the nature of the investigation as 13 months has lapsed since the registration of the FIR.
The issue involved “whether the investigation is credible or not and why FIR was registered in October 2009 when a specific and not vague complaint was filed by Subramanian Swamy for the sanction to prosecute Raja,” he submitted.
Further, on 9 May, 2009, one Arun Agarwal had filed a complaint regarding Swan Technology owned by Reliance Infocomm, the shares of which was transferred to unknown entity, he said.
Bhushan said it has to be found out what happened after the registration of the case by the CBI as the agnecy has written a letter to the Income Tax Department following which the transcript of the alleged conversation between various persons including corporate lobbyist Nira Radia and others including Raja’s private secretary R. K. Chandolia surfaced.
Materials are enough to charge Raja and others with criminal misconduct and abuse of official position which has been established by the CAG report, Bhushan said.