SC rejects Bhushan’s plea on Sibal

The minister,Bhushan argued,had reduced a Rs 50 crore penalty proposed on Reliance for stopping telecom services in 13 circles without prior notice and in violation of Universal Service Obligation Fund (USOF) agreement to a mere Rs 5 crore.

Sibal had reduced the penalty even though Reliance had halted services after bagging the USOF contract by “predatory bidding” only to later back out and jeopardise the scheme,he argued.

But the arguments failed for the simple reason that the bench decided that the USOF contract was not part of the 2G scam.

“The USOF contract… how is this concerned to the Supreme Court looking into Raja? This issue cannot be linked with what we are hearing,” the bench observed.

Senior advocate Rohinton Fali Nariman,appearing for the first time in the 2G case as the telecom ministry’s counsel and assisted by Additional Solicitor General AS Chandhioke,had to only vigorously second this observation besides agreeing at one particular point that USOF and the 2G hearings in the SC were indeed not “linked”.

Nariman’s entry follows senior advocate Gopal Subramanium’s resignation as Solicitor General and also counsel for the ministry in the case. Subramanium owed his resignation to being miffed at Sibal’s decision to appoint Nariman.

The court,as far as the “reduction in penalty”,asked Bhushan whether there has been any complaint whatsoever till date.

“Has any person come up with a grievance so far? If this (reduction of penalty) is an illegal action,then any person aggrieved will be eligible to challenge it,” Justice Singhvi said.

Similarly,Bhushan submitted for the NGO that need of the hour was “effective monitoring of the investigation”,and it can be “extremely useful to have those who can devote themselves to this investigation”.

The lawyer said his side was “handicapped” by the vague readings of the status reports by the CBI and ED on the progress in the investigation. The reports are handed over to the court in a sealed cover and not parted with to the other parties.

“Look at the status reports,some parts are read out. We are not able to get a complete picture,” Bhushan sought for transparency.

“But we are monitoring the progress of the probe. It seems satisfactory,” Justice Ganguly cut in.

“We don’t…” Bhushan began,but was interrupted again by the judge who asked whether the lawyer wanted the court’s powers of monitoring to be “outsourced”.

“Basically you want some two retired persons to watch over,” Justice Ganguly asked him.

“Look at the black money case. Retired judges have been appointed. These people can devote adequate time and expertise,” Bhushan said.

Justice Singhvi at this point compared the situation before and after the Supreme Court took over. And pointed out how the investigation had lapsed for a full year until in 2010 the apex court decided to step in.

“Two chargesheets have already been filed. Now the CBI and ED has traced money to foreign nations. At this point the probe is in the right course. There is no need for another body,” Justice Ganguly said.

“But since you are insistent,we can hear your application in detail,” Justice Singhvi offered,at which Bhushan replied that he was not “insistent”.

“Then let it go on as it is,” Justice Singhvi said.