2G judge missed basic facts, public prosecutor hits out

2G judge missed basic facts, public prosecutor hits out

The 2G scam case judge O P Saini's unusual severity in faulting special public prosecutor Anand Grover while acquitting all accused was returned in the same coin by the SPP on Friday when he said the trial judge made silly mistakes in even reading the basic document, the chargesheet.
Grover told TOI that the trial judge found the chargesheet faulty. "If the chargesheet was faulty, why did he frame charges at all? He should have discharged all the accused only on that ground. No trial judge proceeds with the trial after finding the chargesheet faulty," he said.

Grover was made the special public prosecutor by the Supreme Court after SPP and senior advocate U U Lalit was appointed as a SC judge.

He said the trial judge appeared to have completely missed the tabular chart provided by CBI detailing the transfer of Rs 200 crore by Dynamics, a real estate company, to Kusegaon, a fruit and vegetable trader, which had no business. The money was then transferred to Cineyug Films to be finally routed to Kalaignar TV, he said.

"The money trail was vivid and detailed. The tabular chart provided by CBI during trial proceedings clearly brought out the sequence and motive behind the payments. Yet, the chart does not even get referred to by the trial judge," Grover said.

Grover said it was the cardinal duty of the trial judge to look for facts in the midst of the jungle of documents. "But, the judge preferred to go by the contradictory and varying explanations given by the defence lawyers on the money trial. The trial judge made so many mistakes," he said.

What appeared to have riled the trial judge was Grover's refusal to sign certain documents and written submissions on behalf of CBI during the trial. "As senior advocates, we file written submissions in the SC in many cases. Not even once, the SC has asked me or any senior advocate to sign written submissions.Moreover, I refused to sign written submissions when I found that counsel for the accused were not being asked to sign written submissions and documents submitted by them. I am unable to understand why my refusal alone annoyed the trial judge," he said. He said it was clear from documents that the allotment process was changed, not by any bureaucrat, but by the then telecom minister and this came out clearly even from the SC judgement. "Those who were ineligible got spectrum. Common sense applied to the documentary evidence provided by CBI would depict this can't happen without the minister's involvement," he said.

 
The article was first published in Times Of India.

Disclaimer:"The views in the article are of the author and do not represent the views of the Invisible Lawyer"

[related_posts_by_tax format="thumbnails" image_size="large" posts_per_page="4"]