...Questions Evidence Relied Upon by the Probe Agency
WORRISOME TREND This is a dangerous trend and can strike at the root of rule of law and constitutional democracy as wrongdoers can gang up against those, who, by the perusal of record, are innocent RULING Special CBI Court
New Delhi: Discharging all the accused in the Aircel-Maxis case, the special CBI court has questioned the “evidence” relied upon by the CBI besides commenting adversely about the role of “scared, submissive and obstructive bureaucracy”.
This, the judge has held that it is “a threat to constitutional democracy and rule of law”. Referring to the statements of the officers recorded by the CBI, the judge has held that the “oral statements” made by the officers was contrary to the record.
“I have no manner of doubt that these officers were timid and obstructive at the time of preparation of record as well as subsequently when making the statement to the CBI, wherein they readily shifted the blame to others,” according to the judgment.
The ruling further states: “This is a dangerous trend and can strike at the root of rule of law and the constitutional democracy as wrong doers can gang up against those, who, by the perusal of record, are innocent.”
“The official record which is deemed to be correct and true shall lose all importance and wrong doers would have a hay day as by making oral statement they can accuse anyone and themselves go scot-free. In the instant case, everyone who was responsible for any delay, wrong doing or obstructive questions have been made a witness and has thus, readily and willingly made an oral statement, fully and wholly contrary to the official record,” according to the statement.
The ruling also refers to what it calls the “anxiety” of the investigating officer to “somehow implicate the accused”. The court refused to place reliance on valuation reports of ENAM Securities (P) Ltd and Tata Sky Ltd which were relied upon by the CBI to prove its case that Maxis’ valuation of Sun DTH was too high and the Malaysian company’s investment in the Sun DTH amounted to a bribe.
Holding that these reports are based on “several assumptions and presumptions”, the court has held that a bare perusal of these reports would reveal that these reports “assume too much and prove too little. There is hardly any fact in these reports which can be put to legal proof ”.