<p>The trial against some of the accused in the 2G scam would have been "demolished" if CBI Director Ranjit Sinha had his way and his instructions were followed, the Special Public Prosecutor of the case told the Supreme Court today.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Raising serious doubts on Sinha's credibility and also on the role of a former Law Minister in giving favourable opinion against some accused, the apex court-appointed SPP, Anand Grover, said that the trial against the accused could have collapsed if his predecessor U U Lalit (now a SC Judge) had abided by the instructions of the CBI Director.<br /><br />"Our case would have been demolished. It was completely inconsistent to the stand taken by CBI in the case," he said while referring to the communication of the former SPP and Sinha in which the Director had sought to revise the probe against Reliance Telecom Limited and Swan Telecom in the case.<br /><br />He submitted that Sinha had tried to interfere at the fag end of the trial which was going on for last three years and prosecution evidence was almost over and said "it was going against the very core of the case."<br /><br />Grover said that information that he gathered, after going through all file notings, is "shocking" and cannot be revealed in an open court.<br /><br />He also raised questions on the opinion of the Law Ministry to allegedly favour some of the firms facing trial in the 2G case.<br /><br />"It is a sad story how ministry works. An official deposed saying that it was done on the basis of file notings of the minister but the question is who was the person behind the minister. Its shocking," he said.<br /><br />The bench was also told that there was delay in filing the charge sheet in the case relating to former telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran and others in Aircel-Maxis deal as the Director had referred the matter to the Attorney General.</p>
<p>The trial against some of the accused in the 2G scam would have been "demolished" if CBI Director Ranjit Sinha had his way and his instructions were followed, the Special Public Prosecutor of the case told the Supreme Court today.<br /><br /></p>.<p>Raising serious doubts on Sinha's credibility and also on the role of a former Law Minister in giving favourable opinion against some accused, the apex court-appointed SPP, Anand Grover, said that the trial against the accused could have collapsed if his predecessor U U Lalit (now a SC Judge) had abided by the instructions of the CBI Director.<br /><br />"Our case would have been demolished. It was completely inconsistent to the stand taken by CBI in the case," he said while referring to the communication of the former SPP and Sinha in which the Director had sought to revise the probe against Reliance Telecom Limited and Swan Telecom in the case.<br /><br />He submitted that Sinha had tried to interfere at the fag end of the trial which was going on for last three years and prosecution evidence was almost over and said "it was going against the very core of the case."<br /><br />Grover said that information that he gathered, after going through all file notings, is "shocking" and cannot be revealed in an open court.<br /><br />He also raised questions on the opinion of the Law Ministry to allegedly favour some of the firms facing trial in the 2G case.<br /><br />"It is a sad story how ministry works. An official deposed saying that it was done on the basis of file notings of the minister but the question is who was the person behind the minister. Its shocking," he said.<br /><br />The bench was also told that there was delay in filing the charge sheet in the case relating to former telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran and others in Aircel-Maxis deal as the Director had referred the matter to the Attorney General.</p>