Unitech MD pleads for bail in spectrum case

Senior advocate Ram Jethmalani also cited various judgments of the different Courts besides the conduct of the accused before and after his arrest for his release on bail. He assailed the order of the Delhi High Court and the trial Court denying Chandra bail saying that they consistently referred to huge loss of over Rs 30,000 crore caused to the exchequer during the spectrum allocation even as the TRAI maintained that there was no loss.

He also submitted that the HC and trial courts failed to provide the accused the copy of the report prepared by TRAI. The apex court, however, asked the counsel to proceed on the basis of newspaper reports.

“All the principles of the bail were ignored. There is total misunderstanding of the principles of the bail. The purpose of bail is preventive and not punitive. The grant of bail is rule and its denial an exception,” Jethmalani said.

Pointing out that Chandra who has been in jail for 150 days was denied bail on the ground that there was a possibility of him influencing witnesses, the counsel said that one should not be prosecuted alleging possibility.

Jethmalani also submitted that Chandra had appeared before the CBI and never absented himself throughout the investigation.

The advancing of arguments by the counsel remained inconclusive and would resume on Tuesday.

The Court is hearing the bail applications of Chandra and Vivek Goenka, DB Realty’s managing director. The CBI, in its first charge sheet in 2G scam case filed on April 2, had accused Goenka and Chandra of cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy along with Raja.