The Supreme Court on Wednesday said the CBI probe into the allegations in Aircel-Maxis deal involving former telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran and a Malaysian business tycoon “prima facie indicates a nexus”.
The court said the CBI’s status report also reveals that a “politically and financially influential person in Malaysia is influencing the probe”.
“We have completed the domestic probe and have to complete the investigation about the deal in Malaysia and Mauritius. Letters Rogatory have been sent to those countries... The gentleman in Malaysia who is involved in it is economically powerful and he is also powerful politically,” the agency’s counsel K K Venugopal submitted without taking any names.
Informed sources said Maxis Communication chairman T Ananda Krishnan is suspected to be delaying the investigation. Maran has been accused of “forcing” Chennai-based telecom promoter C Sivasankaran to sell the stake in Aircel to Maxis in 2006.
After dispatching letter rogatory to Malaysia, a team of CBI officials had gone to Kuala Lumpur in April in an attempt to expedite their request. During their visit, the CBI was assured cooperation from the attorney general’s office of Malyasia. But a month later, Malaysian authorities wrote to CBI seeking some clarification in the agency’s LR, which was replied immediately.
Despite, the agency’s reply, a fresh clarification was dispatched again by the Malaysian authorities for asking more information on the subject.
In another development, a bench of Justices GS Singhvi and KS Radhakrishnan stayed a judgment by Allahabad HC that had directed probe into certain allegation against an ED officer Raghubir Singh, who is investigating the case, and directed the UP government not to go ahead with the proceedings against him.
Raghubir Singh has challenged the HC order and said someone high in the hierarchy is behind the PIL. Directing the state government to protect Raghubir Singh, the judges told him to “investigate the case fearlessly”.
“He is acting as an officer of the court and we are monitoring the case. They are flouting our order by taking action against him,” the court said.