Tweet
Takes credit for ensuring probe
The Supreme Court did not lose out the opportunity to take credit for ensuring investigations into the 2G scam. For the first time, the apex court made it clear that it was them and not the Centre which ensured the “dormant” 2G probe was taken to its logical end.
Correcting this misconception that surfaced in the Delhi High Court decision rejecting the petition of Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy seeking sanction against former Telecom Minister A Raja, the bench said, “The HC had proceeded under a wholly erroneous assumption that respondent (Prime Minister) had directed investigation by the CBI into the allegations of grave irregularities in the grant of licenses.”
After an enquiry by CVC that led CBI to register a case on October 21, 2009, the bench said, “For the next about one year, the matter remained dormant and the CBI took steps for vigorous investigation only when this Court intervened in the matter.”
On the question of what was required to be done by sanctioning authority for granting sanction against corrupt officials, the bench said, “The Competent Authority cannot undertake a detailed inquiry to decide whether or not the allegations made against the public servant are true.”
The Supreme Court did not lose out the opportunity to take credit for ensuring investigations into the 2G scam. For the first time, the apex court made it clear that it was them and not the Centre which ensured the “dormant” 2G probe was taken to its logical end.
Correcting this misconception that surfaced in the Delhi High Court decision rejecting the petition of Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy seeking sanction against former Telecom Minister A Raja, the bench said, “The HC had proceeded under a wholly erroneous assumption that respondent (Prime Minister) had directed investigation by the CBI into the allegations of grave irregularities in the grant of licenses.”
After an enquiry by CVC that led CBI to register a case on October 21, 2009, the bench said, “For the next about one year, the matter remained dormant and the CBI took steps for vigorous investigation only when this Court intervened in the matter.”
On the question of what was required to be done by sanctioning authority for granting sanction against corrupt officials, the bench said, “The Competent Authority cannot undertake a detailed inquiry to decide whether or not the allegations made against the public servant are true.”
