Prosecution failed, doesn’t mean no case: Judge who shot down 2G award

“Kindly read the judgment as a whole. Trial court has said prosecution has failed to adduce any evidence to prove the allegations. That’s all,” Justice Singhvi told The Indian Express Friday.

Written by Ananthakrishnan G | New Delhi | Updated: December 23, 2017 7:20 am
The bench said “material produced before the court shows that the Minister of C&IT (Communications and Information Technology) wanted to favour some companies at the cost of the public exchequer…”.

A day after a special court acquitted UPA telecom minister A Raja, his DMK colleague and MP Kanimozhi and 15 others in a case relating to alleged irregularities in the allocation of 2G spectrum in 2008, former Supreme Court judge G S Singhvi, who authored the February 2012 apex court judgment cancelling telecom licences and the allotted spectrum, said the trial court order did not mean there was no case at all, but only that the prosecution had not been able to prove the charges.

“Kindly read the judgment as a whole. Trial court has said prosecution has failed to adduce any evidence to prove the allegations. That’s all,” Justice Singhvi told The Indian Express Friday.

“There are two things in criminal law. One, no case at all; and second, no evidence. In this case, as per press reports, there is no evidence… If somebody commits a crime but no evidence is produced, the person can’t be convicted,” he said.

Express explained | Decoding the 2G spectrum verdict: Charge by charge, how the case collapsed

In 2012, cancelling the licences allotted during Raja’s tenure as minister, the bench of Justices Singhvi and A K Ganguly had ruled that “the exercise undertaken by the officers of the DoT (Department of Telecom) between September 2007 and March 2008, under the leadership of the then Minister of C&IT, was wholly arbitrary, capricious and contrary to public interest apart from being violative of the doctrine of equality.”

The bench said “material produced before the court shows that the Minister of C&IT (Communications and Information Technology) wanted to favour some companies at the cost of the public exchequer…”.

On this, Justice Singhvi said the issue before the Supreme Court was “entirely different”. The issue before the apex court, he said, was that of legality of the spectrum allocation process, while that before the trial court was one of criminality. He declined to comment on the zero-loss theory, merely saying that the then government had said that the spectrum auction had fetched Rs 60,000 crore.

On Thursday, the court of judge O P Saini acquitted the 17 accused in the case, including Raja and Kanimozhi, saying there was “nil evidence on record” and pulled up the CBI for not doing its prosecution homework.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. Drvn Sharma
    Dec 24, 2017 at 6:47 pm
    The end result or the Court orders come on the basis of evidence and argument linking the events. In absence of proof/ evidence the crime or scam was not committed. If such opinions are given on every issue then it will not be known who committed the crime and who did not.
    (0)(0)
    Reply
    1. Tejal Dixit
      Dec 24, 2017 at 8:06 am
      Some lower court judges are using thier own free will to pass judgements. Not the law. These are small people who want to feel big. The CBI presents the evidence , the judge does not accept it and throws legal rigmaroles at the CBI. The court judges have to access the truth,not find means to avoid. Sometimes they need to filter out the truth from the statements given by witnesses. Not block. If witnesses are threatened, it is not a means for court judges to for go justice. SOMETHING STINKS IN THE LOWER COURTS.
      (0)(0)
      Reply
      1. Jayant Wakhale
        Dec 23, 2017 at 3:58 pm
        We can wake up a person who is slipping, but cannot wake up person who is pretending to be slipping. Same has happened in this case.
        (2)(0)
        Reply
        1. Vijay Sankar S
          Dec 23, 2017 at 11:33 am
          The people of Inda sincerely hope that the the legal eagles managing Vijaya Mallya extradition would more energetic purposeful in their instructions to the English QC than the CBI luminaries who prosecuted the extradition matter of Kim Davies of Purulia Arms drop case in Denmark. The Danish judge was scathing in his remark about the commitment of the INDIAN PROSECUTION just like Justise O.P.Saini. Hope the powers in the government take note of these law officers and their handlers who by omission or commision make it impossible for the judiciary to find them guilty. In Boxing parlance, pulling a punch and losing a fight would mean life disqualification.
          (1)(1)
          Reply
          1. Suhas Gha
            Dec 23, 2017 at 11:26 am
            What can we say? Hon judge like u must have studied and then given verdict in 2012 cancelling 2G spectrums awarded to as many as 122 clients. U must have concluded ur judgement only on the basis and not on notional imaginary loss, identified by CAG. Most of the people were misled by just an astronomical sum. Can we see how many zeros in 1.76L cror.? Just let us right.. 1700000000000 11 zeros on 17, No one has even thought of this kind of loss. And every one has carried out with this number, only notional loss. BJP gained. And auctioned furthrt only to mint the money. But in a way, telecom companies are on vefge of bankrupsy and government will bail down by paying huge sum for reducing NPA. But neither bjp, nor modi and company are asamed of its false and misleading campaign against upa. That party is shameless including their parent organisation rss. Above all, rajanathsing, modi are not telling on such a blatanr failure of cbi.Rajanathsingh and cbi chief must be sacked
            (3)(9)
            Reply
            1. Load More Comments