New Delhi, Feb 4 (IANS) Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy’s plea to make Home Minister P. Chidambaram a co-accused in the 2G case was Saturday dismissed by a special CBI court in Delhi. The following are the key points of the verdict:
* There is no material on record to show that P. Chidambaram was acting malafide in fixing the price of spectrum at the 2001 level or in permitting dilution of equity by the two companies.
* These two acts are not per se illegal and there is no further material on record to show any other incriminating act on the part of P. Chidambaram.
* A decision taken by a public servant does not become criminal for simple reason that it has caused loss to the public exchequer or resulted in pecuniary advantage to others. Merely attending meetings and taking decisions therein is not a criminal act.
* It (decision) must have the taint of use of corrupt or illegal means or abuse of his official position by public servant for obtaining pecuniary advantage by him for himself or for any other person or obtaining of pecuniary advantage by him without any public interest.
* In the absence of any other incriminating act on his (Chidambaram) part, it cannot be said that he was prima facie party to the criminal conspiracy. There is no evidence on record that he was acting in pursuit to the criminal conspiracy, while being party to the two decisions regarding non-revision of the spectrum pricing and dilution of equity by the two companies.
* There is no evidence of any substantive act being committed by him. A bit of evidence here and a bit there does not constitute prima facie evidence for showing existence of a criminal conspiracy.
* A bare perusal of the allegations and the evidence, led in support thereof, reveals that neither are there any allegations nor is evidence against P. Chidambaram to the effect that he played any role in the subversion of the process of issuance of letters of intent (LOI), UAS (Univeral Access Service) licences and allocation of spectrum in 2007-08.
* The subversion of the process of issuance of letters of intent, UAS licences and allocation of spectrum included arbitrary fixation of the cut-off date, filing and procuring of applications for UAS licences on behalf of ineligible companies, violation of first-come first-served policy in the issuance of LOIs, UAS licences and allocation of spectrum and payment and receipt of bribe.
* All these incriminating acts were allegedly done by the minister/officials of the department of telecommunications, ministry of information and broadcasting, government of India and by private persons.
* However, both of these acts (fixing the price of the spectrum licence at 2001 level and permitting two companies), attributed to him, are not per se illegal or violative of any law.
* He (Chidambaram) agreed with A. Raja not to revise or revisit the entry fee or spectrum charge as discovered in 2001. Non-revision of prices is not an illegal act by itself.
* There is no material on record to suggest that Chidambaram was acting with such corrupt or illegal motives or was in abuse of his official position, while consenting to the two decisions. There is no evidence that he obtained any pecuniary advantage without any public interest.
* There is such incriminating material against other accused persons, who stand charged and are facing trial.
* There is no evidence on record to suggest that there was an agreement between Chidambaram and A. Raja to subvert telecom policy and obtain pecuniary advantage for himself or for any other person.
* Anybody and everybody associated with a decision in any degree cannot be roped as an accused. The role played by the decision maker, circumstances in which the decision was taken and the intention of the decision maker are the relevant facts.
* P. Chidambaram was party to only two decisions, that is, keeping the spectrum prices at the 2001 level and dilution of equity by two companies. These two acts are not per se criminal.
