After a marathon hearing stretching into weeks, the Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved its verdict in the 2G spectrum scam case on the question of monitoring of the CBI investigation and indicated that it might issue directions to the agency and the Centre on various aspects, including widening the ambit of the probe up to 2001, the base year for fixing the price for 2G licences at `1,655 crore by DoT under former communications minister A. Raja.
While reserving its judgment, a bench comprising Justices G.S. Singhvi and A.K. Ganguly, which had kept the government and its probe agencies on their toes by putting several sharp queries, gave ample indications about considering a wide range of issues for giving directions to the CBI and the government to expedite the investigation.
The contentious issues to be considered in its verdict by the court include various types of irregularities committed in the process of allocating 2G spectrum licences by Mr Raja and officers functioning under his command, including fixing spectrum prices at 2001 rates as was brought to light by the CAG in its report, and earlier by the CVC in its letter to the government. “The issue here is not only `1.76 lakh crore but of a much wider canvas as what happened in 2001 needs to be looked into,” the bench observed.
The court would also consider sale of equity by some licencees, as referred to in the CAG report and the initial letter of the CVC to the government; public sector banks giving loans on hypothecation of 2G licences even before issuing of letters of intent; a probe into money-laundering and the trial of such illegal financial transaction cases, if they come to light, by a special court.
The apex court would also look into the crucial aspect of the CVC and whether the “watchdog” against corruption, minus its controversial chief P.J. Thomas, would be an effective agency to supervise the CBI investigation, or whether a special committee of some expert officers is needed to assist the court to oversee the probe considering the complex nature of the case. The government earlier had made a categorical statement in court that Mr Thomas had decided to keep himself away from the monitoring of the CBI probe.
As the bench expressed grave concern over certain media reports stating that several public sector banks, including SBI, had offered loans to the tune of `26,000 crore to spectrum licencees on “hypothecation”, the judges said if this was true then “it is very serious”. However, CBI counsel Venugopal said all banking transactions were being looked into by the agency.
“We are only broadly indicating that it (banks advancing loans to companies) should be probed. All transactions between licencees and the banks should be looked into,” the court said, adding that if media reports about the nexus between the public sector banks and the companies getting 2G licences were true, then “it is astonishing... it then goes much farther from what (arguments) are being advanced (sic)”.
The CBI counsel offered to file a “preliminary report” by the end of January especially covering the aspect of a nexus between the banks and the companies and stated that if the court is not satisfied with the report, it could issue “specific directions” for probing this aspect separately. “But for that the CBI would need to register a separate FIR relating to the financial aspects of the matter,” Mr Venugopal said, clarifying that this case would be independent of the present FIR in the 2G case registered by the CBI under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The bench told Mr Venugopal in clear terms that it would not like any of the CBI officers involved in the investigation of the case transferred or disturbed in any manner. “Once the court is monitoring the investigation, the officers should be confident that they will not be disturbed,” the bench warned.