SC calls CBI's probe in 2G scam slipshod

The Supreme Court today slammed CBI for its “slipshod” investigations into the 2G spectrum allocation scam, in which the alleged role of Communications Minister A Raja has come under the scanner. The apex court said “the same minister is still continuing today”.

“You (CBI) have not done anything. The matter is serious. The same minister is still continuing today. Is that the way the government functions? Do you follow the same standards in respect of everyone? One year has (already) gone by,” a bench comprising Justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly said.

The remarks of the bench came as soon as Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Haren Raval began responding to the submissions made by the counsel for an NGO that brought the issue before the court.

The ASG said the enormity, complexity and volume of the documents involved in the issue required some more time to complete the investigation.

“We have so many phone calls to examine,” Raval said.

However, his submission was cut short by the Bench, which said “it’s only slipshod. You are dragging your feet”.

Raval then resumed his submission and said the complex nature of the issue was the reason the investigations into the scam had taken some time.

He said to maintain continuity, the investigation was being carried out in the right earnest and senior officials of competence were conducting the investigations into all aspects of the matter.

At this point, the bench shot back “will it take another 10 years?”

The ASG replied the investigation would be completed within six months. After this, the Bench wanted to know about the response to the draft reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), which had pointed out that the scam on 2G spectrum allocation caused a loss of Rs 1.4 lakh crore to the exchequer.

The counsel, appearing for the Centre, said Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium was to argue in the matter but was not available due to ill health.

Senior advocate T R Andhyarujina, appearing for Raja, said the response to the CAG report had been given by the Department of Telecommunications.

He claimed a totally “wrong impression” has been given by filing draft reports of CAG to “sensationalise” the entire issue.

The senior advocate said selective portions were brought to the notice of the court and the minister’s reply to the Chief Vigilance Commission was not read out.

“The Minister has given a complete answer to the CVC,” Andhyarujina said.