Why the case fell flat, what the probe agencies plan to do next
Judge OP Saini said that India’s federal investigators could not prove allegations of criminality against the accused in the case. “I have absolutely no hesitation in holding that prosecution has miserably failed to prove any charge against any accused,” he told the courtroom.
Though the CBI and ED have confirmed they will appeal against the verdict, legal experts said without any new evidence of criminality, it will be difficult to cut ice with the court. “A key ingredient in proving criminality would be evidence of gratification. There were none,” defence counsel Rebecca John told HT.
A top official in the ED said there are several letters rogatory (LR) or letters of request pending in the case. These pertain to allegations of bribes that changed hands between Raja and the telecomcompanies.Answerstothem would help the investigating agencies take the case forward.
An LR is a formal request issued by a competent court to a foreign court and processed by the ministry of external affairs on behalf of the investigative agencies to obtain information about individuals and entities.
“We have an LR pending with Switzerland. It is to probe if there was a quid pro quo between Reliance Telecom and Raja,” said the ED official cited above.
Saini also pointed to several incorrect facts in the chargesheets. “I may add that many facts recorded in the charge sheet are factually incorrect, like finance secretary strongly recommending revision of entry fee, deletion of a clause of draft LOI (letter of intent) by A Raja, recommendations of TRAI for revision of entry fee, etc,”he said.
Since the allegations of irregularity surfaced against A Raja, it has been held by investigators that he misled the prime minister on ways of allocating the 2G spectrum licenses. But Saini contradicted this as well.
“It is clear that complete facts were not placed before the then Prime Minister by his own office, for which A. Raja cannot be faulted,” he said.
NEW DELHI: