Former communications minister A. Raja on Monday tried to involve Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Union home minister P. Chidambaram in the 2G case, telling a court that both the Prime Minister and Mr Chidambaram (when he was finance minister) were aware of the sale of equity by spectrum licencees.

The BJP responded to the development by immediately demanding the resignations of the Prime Minister and the home minister. Communications minister Kapil Sibal was fielded to defend the government’s stance and, while speaking to a news agency, Mr Chidambaram also clarified his stand.
Defending himself, Mr Raja, arrested in connection with the multicore 2G spectrum scam, told the court that the then finance minister, Mr Chidambaram, had said in front of the Prime Minister that “dilution of shares does not amount to the sale of a 2G licence as per corporate law.” He added: “Let the Prime Minister deny this.”
Senior advocate Sushil Kumar, appearing for Mr Raja, argued that sale of equity was not equivalent to the sale of a licence and that Mr Raja cannot be accused of corruption in the entire deal. It was argued that when “sale of equity does not amount to sale of licence, there is no question of earning a profit. How can this be corruption?” Mr Raja’s counsel then said, “If Raja is being prosecuted for following a certain policy then all telecom ministers since 1993 are liable to be prosecuted and should be in jail along with him as they too followed the same policy.”
It was pointed out that Mr Raja’s predecessor, Mr Arun Shourie, distributed 26 licences, Mr Dayanidhi Maran distributed 25 and Mr Raja distributed 122 licences. The counsel argued that numbers make no difference, but, “it is to be noted that none of them auctioned spectrum”.
“If they had done no wrong, why am I being questioned,” Mr Raja asked the court, adding, “Let them deny that they have not done what I did.” Mr Raja claimed he was merely “following the 2003 Cabinet decision, that is not to auction 2G spectrum.” He asserted, “If I am following the law, I am not liable to be prosecuted. In fact, I should be rewarded.”
Questioning the CBI, Mr Raja asked how the investigative agency could decide the quantum of loss when it is the government that should decide this figure. “The CBI, however, is maintaining that when DB Realty gave its shares (in Swan Telecom) to bring in money, it amounted to a sale, and so is the case with Unitech (Wireless). But when Tata Teleservices gave its shares to bring in FDI, it, according to the CBI, does not amount to a sale,” Mr Raja argued.
He told the court that Unitech sold 67 per cent equity for `6,120 crore while Tata Teleservices got `13,973 crore by selling just 27 per cent equity. Nowhere in the entire transaction has Sanjay Chandra of Unitech (now behind bars) been named as a conspirator, Mr Raja said, adding that “the only sin of DB Realty and Unitech, who are actually realty developers, is that they have got good contacts and brought money from abroad”. The former communications minister claimed it was his “obligation to social justice that every man on the street should have a mobile phone and I made the call rates of mobile phone so cheap that even a rickshawwallah or maidservant can be seen using it”.
While BJP chief Nitin Gadkari said that since Congress chief Sonia Gandhi said there would be no compromise on corruption the party wanted to know “what action she intends to take against Singh and Chidambaram”. Reacting sharply, Mr Sibal said it was “unfortunate” that the BJP president had demanded their resignations on the basis of Mr Raja’s arguments in court. “He (Gadkari) should have consulted Arun Jaitley or some other lawyer,” he said. Responding to the allegations, Mr Chidambaram said the “only issue examined by him as finance minister, and by the Prime Minister, was if the two new telecom licencees, Swan and Unitech, were divesting.”