Dayanidhi Maran's fate in Aircel-Maxis case to be decided on January 24

The case was lodged by the CBI and the ED

A judge hitting gavel with paper at wooden table. (Photo: Shutterstock)
A judge hitting gavel with paper at wooden table. (Photo: Shutterstock)
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Jan 18 2017 | 12:24 PM IST

A special court will pronounce on Tuesday next its order on framing charge against former Telecom Minister Dayanidhi Maran, his brother Kalanithi Maran and others in the Aircel-Maxis deal case lodged by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Special Judge O P Saini, who was scheduled to pass the order on Wednesday on framing of charge as well as on bail applications of the Maran brothers and other accused persons, deferred it to January 24, saying the order is yet to be prepared.

All the accused have denied the allegations against them made by the investigating agencies and have moved bail pleas.

During the arguments on the framing of charge, Special Public Prosecutor Anand Grover had claimed that Dayanidhi had "pressurised" Chennai-based telecom promoter C Sivasankaran to sell his stakes in Aircel and two subsidiary firms to Malaysian firm Maxis Group in 2006.

The charge was strongly refuted by Dayanidhi.

CBI had filed a charge-sheet against the Maran brothers, Ralph Marshall, T Ananda Krishnan, M/s Sun Direct TV (P) Ltd, M/s Astro All Asia Networks Plc, UK, M/s Maxis Communications Berhad, Malaysia, M/s South Asia Entertainment Holdings Ltd, Malaysia and then Additional Secretary (Telecom) late J S Sarma.

They were charge sheeted for alleged offences punishable under section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC and under relevant provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

In the money laundering case, ED has charge sheeted as accused the Maran brothers, Kalanithi's wife Kavery, Managing Director of South Asia FM Ltd (SAFL) K Shanmugam, SAFL and Sun Direct TV Pvt Ltd (SDTPL) under provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The court had summoned the six accused after taking cognisance of the ED's charge sheet, saying there was "enough incriminating material" to proceed against them.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jan 18 2017 | 12:13 PM IST

Next Story