Senior advocate Anand Grover, who was appointed as the Special Prosecutor by the apex court for prosecution of 2G spectrum scam cases and cases arising out of the probe in the scandal, withdrew the petition filed by him in which he had also sought execution of bail bonds of those discharged.
A bench comprising Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justices N V Ramana and D Y Chandrachud allowed his plea.
"Why should we tell you what you should do. You go where you want to go. We cannot tell you where to go. Should we tell every litigant that you go to that or this court. Is that the work which the Supreme Court should do from morning to evening," the bench said.
A day after the Marans were discharged in the case last week, the SPP, without waiting for the Enforcement Directorate, had moved the apex court in his individual capacity seeking certain orders relating to their discharge.
On February 2, a special court here had discharged Maran
brothers and two companies - M/s Sun Direct TV (P) Ltd (SDTPL) and M/s South Asia Entertainment Holdings Ltd- in the Aircel-Maxis deal cases lodged by CBI and ED, saying the charges were based on "misreading of official files", speculation and surmises of complainant C Sivasankaran.
In the money laundering case, ED had chargesheeted 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).
His plea had led to asking of some probing questions by the apex court, which did not agree with the grounds taken by him and said the discharge of the accused made it clear that this case was not of money laundering as alleged by ED.
"The simple logic is that this money (Rs 742.58 crore), considered to be that of laundering, is not found to be that of the proceeds of the crime," the bench had said.
He had said that ED will file a proper appeal after consultation and approval but due to urgency in the matter, he had moved the apex court with only two prayers that the bail bonds should not be executed and the attached properties should not be released.
However, the apex court disputed his contention and said the discharge order is the final order.
The bench had asked the SPP to prepare a fresh petition so that there should not be any objections.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
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
