Trial in 2G cases attracted a lot of public attention: Court

The trial in 2G cases attracted a "lot of public attention" drawing several private and public-spirited persons to the court with claims that true facts were not placed on record,
Special CBI Judge O P Saini said today.
Saini, who acquitted former telecom minister A Raja and others in three separate cases probed by the CBI and ED, noted that a number of applications filed by such private persons in the court were not supported by any legally admissible material.
"It may be noted that trial of the instant case attracted lot of public attention. Everyone was curious to know about the case. Due to this, the courtroom would always remain overcrowded, filled up with persons from all sections of society," the judge said in his verdict.

The court noted that several private persons came before it with claims that true facts were not placed, but when they were questioned as to whether they were in possession of any definite material for making such an assertion, "almost all of them withdrew and left".
"But about a dozen of such persons filed written applications asking either for further investigation of the case or summoning of additional accused left out by the CBI. However, none of these applications were found to be supported by any legally admissible material," it said.

The judge observed that all these applications had to be dismissed as they were based either on the material already on its record or wholly irrelevant material.

Saini also said that none of these persons volunteered to be a court witness in the case.
"It is also to be noted that there are many representations on record made by various prominent public spirited persons before various authorities relating to wrongdoing in the instant case.
"However, none of them also volunteered to enter the witnessbox. What does all this mean? Apparently this means that nobody had any good or first hand material in his possession," the court said.
It said that the fate of the case depended on witnesses from the Department of Telecom (DoT) and from the companies of the accused.

"The witnesses from DoT were either highly guarded, and if I may say so hesitant, in their deposition, and also went against official record rendering themselves unreliable," the judge said.