Tamil Nadu: Plea on Enforcement Directorate probe in 2G case not maintainable
Chennai: The Madras high court on Thursday dismissed as not maintainable “before this court” a batch of petitions which challenged the proceedings of the Enforcement Directorate in connection with its money laundering probe in the Aircel-Maxis deal of the 2G spectrum scam, against 26 companies, in which Karti P. Chidambaram, son of former Union minister P. Chidambaram allegedly has an interest. The judge, Justice B. Rajendran dismissed the petitions from M/s Advantage Strategic Consulting Pvt. Ltd, its directors and others.
“The investigation presently carried on by the ED is seized of by the Supreme Court and the progress of such investigation is being periodically monitored by it. The special court constituted to deal with 2G Spectrum case or Aircel Maxis case has granted permission to carry out further investigation which would empower the ED to file supplementary charge sheet. In such circumstances, this court is not inclined to entertain these petitions and the petitions only deserve to be dismissed”, the judge added.
The judge said it was evident that the investigation carried on by the ED was related to 2G Spectrum case and the original complaint has been filed by the investigation agency for a predicate offence. It was also seen from the charge sheet filed by the CBI in Aircel-Maxis case that the investigation was also being carried on relating to the manner in which Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) approval has been granted and other related issues. Further, the Supreme Court in its order dated February 9, 2015 has categorically held that liberty has not been given to the petitioner therein to approach the high court or any other court except the Special Judge, at the first instance to raise the jurisdictional issue, the judge added.
The judge said, “It was held that the cases arising out of alleged irregularities committed in grant of licenses and Spectrum from 2001 onwards and forming subject matter of CAG report and order dated December 16, 2000 of the Supreme Court are all within the jurisdiction of the Special Court being arising from the “2G Spectrum Case”. In such view of the matter, this court is not inclined to entertain the petitions as they are not maintainable before this court”.
As far as the affidavit filed by the then finance minister (P.Chidambaram) before this court was concerned, even though such an affidavit was not necessary in a case relating to summons issued to his son, yet it has been filed stating that already CBI has recorded his statement as also others connected with the case on December 6, 2014 relating to the FIPB approval but CBI has not found or reported any offence under any law in respect of the said FIPB approval, such an affidavit cannot be a basis for arriving at any conclusion by this court to pass any orders in these petitions. This was more so that permission and/or leave has been granted by the Special Court to the ED to carry out further investigation in this case. In any event, whether CBI has found or reported any scheduled offence in the grant of FIPB approval or not cannot be decided by this court, when such an issue was seized of by the Supreme Court. Therefore, at this stage, this court cannot deal with the averments contained in the affidavit filed by the then finance minister, the judge added. The judge recorded the statement made by the Special Public Prosecutor that the ED has no intention to either humiliate or harass the petitioners, as alleged.
