2G scam: Court allows CBI to place more documents on record

Rejecting the objections of almost all the accused, a Delhi court trying the 2G spectrum allocation case today allowed CBI's plea to submit to it more documents, including the communications between Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and Department of Telecom (DoT), as evidence.

Special Judge OP Saini allowed the agency's plea to submit to the court additional documents, acceding to Special Public Prosecutor UU Lalit's argument that former Telecom Minister A Raja has already been allowed to take three out of the four sets of documents sought to be placed by the agency on the court's record.

"In view of the .... fact that all documents, barring one, have been sought to be placed on record by accused A Raja and his application has been allowed, I do not see any reason for declining the CBI prayer as far as item number 2 (iii) (one particular set of document in the list) is concerned.

"In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the law applicable on the subject, the prayer is allowed and documents are allowed to be placed on record," the court said.

Most of the accused had opposed CBI's plea for placing the additional documents to the court arguing why CBI did not place them despite having them in their possession.

The court said that during arguments, defence counsel had pointed out that the entire TRAI file, from which the documents have been placed on the court record, should be allowed to be submitted to the court as CBI had no objection to it.

"Accordingly, the prayer is allowed and the entire file in which documents, mentioned in the application, are contained, are allowed to be placed on record, copies of which have already been supplied to the accused persons," it said.

A day before scheduled beginning of the deposition by former TRAI's chairman Nripendra Misra, a 2G case witness, on January 11, the CBI had sought to place some additional documents on court records.

The documents include TRAI files, the correspondence between Misra and ex-Telecom Secretary and accused Siddharth Behura on issues of spectrum allocation.

CBI, in its plea, had said the documents could not have been placed on record earlier due to "inadvertence".

The agency's plea was opposed by some of the accused on the ground that the prosecution should not be allowed to file such applications as and when it chooses to do so.

During the arguments, CBI's Special Public Prosecutor U U Lalit submitted there was no legal bar in placing documents, which could not be placed on record earlier with the charge sheet.

"There is no blanket ban in law on placing such documents on record," Lalit argued.

Lalit said all documents, except one set of files, mentioned in its application, had been sought by Raja, whose plea was allowed by the court earlier.

The defence counsel had earlier opposed CBI's plea saying it might prejudice the accused and they might not be able to defend themselves properly.

Swan Telecom promoter Vinod Goenka's counsel Majid Memon today argued that CBI should place before the court all the documents, on which they are relying, within a specific time limit and after that, they should not be allowed to place anything more.

Senior advocate RN Mittal, appearing for Swan Telecom's another promoter Shahid Usman Balwa, said the agency's plea could be allowed but somewhere there should be a time limit to file any other documents.

Lalit, however, accepted that the documents could not have been placed on record due to "mistake".

"I share the concern of all the defence counsel. We accept the mistake and we are trying to rectify it. If there are other documents, which are not yet placed on court's record, we will try to bring it in court in next few days," he said.