Telephone exchange case: HC dismisses Maran brothers' plea seeking quashing of charges

Image
Press Trust of India Chennai
Last Updated : Nov 09 2018 | 8:45 PM IST

The Madras High Court Friday dismissed the petitions of former Union telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran, his brother Kalanidhi Maran and other accused in the 'illegal' telephone exchange case, seeking quashing of charges framed by a CBI court against them.

The HC also directed the CBI court to frame charges afresh.

Justice A D Jagadish Chandira directed the trial court to look into all materials carefully and frame proper and necessary charges in respect of all the seven accused, as contemplated in the Criminal Procedure Code.

Justice Chandira said the prosecution could assist the trial court by filing draft charges, if necessary.

Earlier, the petitioners' lawyers including senior counsel P Wilson contended that the trial court had framed the charges solely on the basis of the investigating officer's opinion and not on materials available on record.

The CBI was wrong in alleging that the former Union minister held telephone connections more than what was legally permitted, the counsels submitted.

The restriction to have only three connections would apply only to Members of Parliament as per the Salaries and Allowances of Members of Parliament Act and not to a cabinet minister, they said.

There was no statutory bar for a minister to have more than three telephone service connections, they argued.

Additional Solicitor General G Rajagopalan contended that the charges had been framed in accordance with the procedure.

The charges date back to the time when Dayanidhi Maran, grandnephew of late DMK chief M Karunanidhi, was Union minister for telecommunications and information technology in the UPA-1 government.

The CBI has alleged that he misused his official position and got private telephone exchanges installed at his residences here which were used for business transactions of the Sun Network.

The High Court had on July 25 held that there were 'heaps' of material evidence against the accused and had directed the special court to frame charges and conclude the trial within a year.

The bench had given its order on a CBI plea, challenging the discharge of the accused by Special Judge S Natarajan on March 14 this year.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*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: Nov 09 2018 | 8:45 PM IST

Next Story