LexSUBRAMANIAN SWAMY versus A. RAJA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012) 11 S.C.R. 873 SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY v. A. RAJA (Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 1688 of 2012 etc.) AUGUST 24, 2012 [G.S. SINGHVI AND K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, JJ.] SCAM: A B 2G Spectrum Scam - Complaint by the appellant before C Special Judge CBI to set in motion provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, against the then Telecom Minister - During examination u/s. 200 Cr.P.C.,the appellant made a/legation that the then Finance Minister and the Telecom Minister were jointly and severely responsible for the scam - Prayer for making the Finance Minister an accused and for carrying out D investigation against him - Special Judge held that the Finance Minister had no role in the subversion of the process of issuance of LOI and UAS Licences and allocation of spectrum in the year 2007-2008 and that there was no evidence that he was acting pursuant to criminal conspiracy E - Prayers for making him accused and initiating investigation against him rejected - Special Leave Petition - Contentions intera/ia that the Finance Minister conspired with the Telecom Minister and thus committed criminal misconduct and that he, by illegal means, obtained pecuniary advantage - Held: The F materials available on record do not lead to the conclusion · that the Finance Minister conspired with the Telecom Minister or that he attempted to hide the illegalities in the award of the licences - Meeting of two ministers by itself would not be sufficient to infer the existence of a conspiracy - Criminal G conspiracy cannot be inferred on the mere fact that there were official discussions between the officers of Ministry of Finance and that of Department of Telecom and between the two 873 874 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 11 S.C.R. A Ministers - A wrong judgment or an inaccurate or incorrect approach or poor management, by itself cannot be said to be a product of criminal conspiracy - In view of the materials on record, it cannot be said that Finance Minister had misused his position or conspired or colluded with the Telecom B Minister so as to fix low entry fee by non-visiting spectrum charges fixed in the year 2001 - No materials were made available even for a prima facie conclusion that the Finance Minister had deliberately allowed dilution of equity .of the two companies - There is also no material made available to C conclude that the Finance Minister abused his official position or used any corrupt or illegal means for obtaining any pecuniary advantage for himself or for any other person - No case is made out against him. 0 Centre for Public Interest Litigation and Ors. etc. v. Union of India and Ors. (2012) 3 SCC 1- referred to. lndo China $team Navigation Co. v. Jasjeet Singh 1964 (6) SCR 594;State of Maharashtra v. Hans George 1965 (1) SCR 123; R.S. Joshi, Sales Tax Officer, Gujarat and Ors. v. E Ajit Mills Ltd. and Anr. 1977 (4) sec 98: 1978 (1) SCR 338 - cited. F G H Case Law Reference: 1964(6) SCR 594 Cited Para 7 1965 (1) SCR 123 Cite.<! Para 7 1978 (1) SCR 338 Cited Para 7 (2012) 3 sec 1 Referred to Para 8 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (Crl) No. 1688 of 2012. From the Judgment & Order dated 04.02.2012 of the SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY v. A. RAJA 875 Sepcial Judge CBI (04) (2G Spectrum Cases), New Delhi in A CC. No. 01 (A)/11. WITH I.A. No. 34 in Civil Appeal No. 10660 of 2010. Subramanian Swamy (In-Person), H.P. Raval, ASG, P.P. Rao, K.K. Venugopal, S. Wasim A. Qadri, Arijit Prasad, D.S. Mahra Anirudh Sharma, Harsh N. Parekh, A.K. Sharma for the Appearing parties. The Order of the Court was delivered by ORDER K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. 1. Common questions arise B c for consideration in both these applications, hence they are D being disposed of by a common order. SLP (Crl.) 1688 of 2012 arises out of an order dated 04.02.2012 in CC No.01(A)/ 11 passed by the Special Judge, CBI (04) (2G Spectrum Cases), New Delhi. I.A. No. 34 of 2012 has been filed by the appellants in Civil Appeal No. 10660 of 2010 claiming almost E identical reliefs. 2. Dr. Subramanian Swamy, the petitioner in special leave petition filed a criminal complaint on 15.12.201 O before the Special Judge, CBI of Central/Delhi to set in motion the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act (for short 'the PC F Act') against A. Raja, the then minister of Telecommunications and to appoint him as a prosecutor under Section 5(3) of the PC Act. The complaint was
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.