SC KEEPS VENUGOPAL AS AMICUS CURIAE FOR 2G
Thursday, 10 September 2015 | PNS | New Delhi
The decision to remove Venugopal, who was appointed special counsel by the apex court to jointly represent both CBI and ED in the monitoring of the 2G case, was reportedly made after the Finance Ministry — the nodal Ministry of ED, cited “conflict of interest” as a ground to remove him. The Government claimed that Venugopal submitted a note without consulting the ED on the shifting of an ED officer Rajeshwar Singh from the 2G probe.
“We have seen it in newspaper. We passed the order (staying transfer of Singh) based on a positive direction by CAT. That is not a big sin,” commented the Bench comprising Chief Justice HL Dattu and Justice Arun Mishra. The 2G petitioners — advocate Prashant Bhushan and Subramanian Swamy, proposed to appoint the senior lawyer as amicus curiae.
Considering that the case was at fag end, the Bench added, “We know how to tell them. It’s a judicial order. We were fully conscious when we passed the order and if that is the ground against you, we want you to be with us.”
The Bench appointed Venugopal as amicus curiae instructing the ED to provide all assistance to him. He will appear for both CBI and ED. Besides, the bench asked the CBI, ED and Income Tax department to hold monthly coordination meetings.
Swamy brought up his pending application in the Aircel-Maxis probe seeking a direction for CBI to reveal the probe against former Finance Minister P Chidambaram. He alleged direct role of Chidambaram in granting Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) to Malaysian company Maxis which bought Aircel.
Venugopal submitted in sealed cover a set of four CBI status reports which according to sources in the CBI contained the CAG’s P&T Audit wings’ findings detailing the illegalities by FIPB in approving the deal.
The Aircel-Maxis deal was worth over Rs 3,500 crore that required approval of Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA). Chidambaram as FIPB Chairman had power to approve foreign investment up to Rs 600 crore and since he did not send the Maxis file for CCEA approval, the agency had questioned him in December last, sources added
The CAG findings revealed that actual money that came from Malaysian company Maxis was more than Rs 4,700 crore. The extra Rs 1,200 above the approved value is expected to invite FEMA violations against Chidambaram and other senior Finance Ministry officials involved in the Aircel-Maxis deal of 2006. The bench decided to go through the reports and deal with Swamy’s application on September 23.
http://www.dailypioneer.com/nation/sc-keeps-venugopal-as-amicus-curiae-for-2g.html
SC to screen CBI file on P Chidambaram in Aircel-Maxis case
Former finance minister P Chidambaram.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on September 23 will scrutinize the CBI's sealed cover report detailing its probe into alleged irregular Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance to the Rs 3,500 crore Aircel-Maxis deal in 2006 and highlights of its examination of former finance minister P Chidambaram.
READ ALSO: ED sleuth refuses to probe Aircel-Maxis case
BJP leader Subramanian Swamy on Wednesday complained before a bench of Chief Justice H L Dattu and Justice Arun Mishra that the CBI was maintaining a studied silence in the case and had not done anything after questioning the former finance minister.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for Centre for Public Interest Litigation, also complained that the CBI had not made any progress since registering a preliminary enquiry (PE) into alleged kickbacks received by the DMK's first family through the alleged nexus between former Tamil Nadu chief minister M Karunanidhi and IPS officer Jaffar Sait.
He said this nexus came to light through certain audio tapes of telephone conversations between Sait and others. "We need to know what the fate of the PE is," Bhushan said.
Appearing as amicus curiae, senior advocate K K Venugopal informed the court that the sealed cover report submitted to the court by the CBI detailed the progress in probe into the FIPB clearance, examination of Chidambaram and the alleged kickbacks to the DMK's first family.
CBI sources said the agency's probe so far has not yet found a link between the FIPB clearance and criminality. They were quick to clarify that the probe was not yet complete as the agency had some doubts over the meaning of the words in the policy decision about FIPB clearance and its implementation on the ground.
"We have sought responses from various departments on the manner in which policy decisions on FIPB clearance was implemented in the past. We have not yet received responses from them," sources said.
It was alleged that the issue of FIPB clearance to the Aircel-Maxis deal should have been referred to the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) headed by the prime minister as this body alone was empowered to clear foreign investments above Rs 600 crore.
Immediately after the CBI examined Chidambaram in December last year, the former finance minister had said, "They (CBI) took a brief statement from me on the FIPB approval. I repeated what I said in my press statement earlier. Nothing more than that.
"In the Aircel-Maxis case, the FIPB sought the approval of the finance minister in accordance with the rules. The case was submitted through the additional secretary and secretary, department of economic affairs. Both of them recommended the case for approval. Approval was granted by me, as finance minister, in the normal course."
He had further said, "I understand that the officials of FIPB who dealt with the matter have explained to the CBI that under the rules, as they stood then, the case required only the approval of the finance minister. I am sure the files will bear out the correctness of this position."
In its charge-sheet in the Aircel-Maxis case, the CBI had named former telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran, his brother Kalanithi Maran, T Ananda Krishnan, Malaysian national Augustus Ralph Marshall and four firms -- Sun Direct TV Pvt Ltd, Maxis Communication Berhad, South Asia Entertainment Holding Ltd and Astro All Asia Network PLC -- as accused in the case.
The CBI had alleged that Maran as telecom minister had "pressurized" and "forced" Chennai-based telecom promoter C Sivasankaran to sell his stake in Aircel and two subsidiary firms to Malaysian firm Maxis in 2006. The Malaysian firm was granted licence within six months after the takeover of Aircel in December 2006.
READ ALSO: ED sleuth refuses to probe Aircel-Maxis case
BJP leader Subramanian Swamy on Wednesday complained before a bench of Chief Justice H L Dattu and Justice Arun Mishra that the CBI was maintaining a studied silence in the case and had not done anything after questioning the former finance minister.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for Centre for Public Interest Litigation, also complained that the CBI had not made any progress since registering a preliminary enquiry (PE) into alleged kickbacks received by the DMK's first family through the alleged nexus between former Tamil Nadu chief minister M Karunanidhi and IPS officer Jaffar Sait.
He said this nexus came to light through certain audio tapes of telephone conversations between Sait and others. "We need to know what the fate of the PE is," Bhushan said.
Appearing as amicus curiae, senior advocate K K Venugopal informed the court that the sealed cover report submitted to the court by the CBI detailed the progress in probe into the FIPB clearance, examination of Chidambaram and the alleged kickbacks to the DMK's first family.
CBI sources said the agency's probe so far has not yet found a link between the FIPB clearance and criminality. They were quick to clarify that the probe was not yet complete as the agency had some doubts over the meaning of the words in the policy decision about FIPB clearance and its implementation on the ground.
"We have sought responses from various departments on the manner in which policy decisions on FIPB clearance was implemented in the past. We have not yet received responses from them," sources said.
It was alleged that the issue of FIPB clearance to the Aircel-Maxis deal should have been referred to the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) headed by the prime minister as this body alone was empowered to clear foreign investments above Rs 600 crore.
Immediately after the CBI examined Chidambaram in December last year, the former finance minister had said, "They (CBI) took a brief statement from me on the FIPB approval. I repeated what I said in my press statement earlier. Nothing more than that.
"In the Aircel-Maxis case, the FIPB sought the approval of the finance minister in accordance with the rules. The case was submitted through the additional secretary and secretary, department of economic affairs. Both of them recommended the case for approval. Approval was granted by me, as finance minister, in the normal course."
He had further said, "I understand that the officials of FIPB who dealt with the matter have explained to the CBI that under the rules, as they stood then, the case required only the approval of the finance minister. I am sure the files will bear out the correctness of this position."
In its charge-sheet in the Aircel-Maxis case, the CBI had named former telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran, his brother Kalanithi Maran, T Ananda Krishnan, Malaysian national Augustus Ralph Marshall and four firms -- Sun Direct TV Pvt Ltd, Maxis Communication Berhad, South Asia Entertainment Holding Ltd and Astro All Asia Network PLC -- as accused in the case.
The CBI had alleged that Maran as telecom minister had "pressurized" and "forced" Chennai-based telecom promoter C Sivasankaran to sell his stake in Aircel and two subsidiary firms to Malaysian firm Maxis in 2006. The Malaysian firm was granted licence within six months after the takeover of Aircel in December 2006.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SC-to-screen-CBI-file-on-P-Chidambaram-in-Aircel-Maxis-case/articleshow/48893011.cms