SC declines plea to stay summons to Marans

Case involves Rs 800 cr kickback paid to Sun TV

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to interfere with the Special 2G court's order issuing summons to  former telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran and his brother as accused in the Aircel-Maxis case.

A bench of Justices V Gopala Gowda and R Banumathi also clarified that the court had on Friday not granted any liberty to Maran and his brother Kalanithi Maran to approach the Delhi High Court.

In a setback to the Marans, the apex court restored its order, declining to interfere with the trial court's order of  October 29, last seeking appearance of the Marans before it on March 2.

“We restore the order passed on February 6...we make it clear that in view of the (previous) decisions quoted by senior advocate K K Venugopal, we hereby make it clear that we have not given any liberty to approach the HC,” the bench said.

On February 6, the apex court had recalled its order allowing Maran and his brother to approach the High Court, a few hours after a senior law officer on behalf of the CBI pointed out that the apex court had earlier directed that any challenge to the 2G court order would lie with the apex court only.

The court had then posted the matter for Monday, arising a conclusion that the matter would be posted before a bench presided over by Chief Justice of India Justice H L Dattu, which has been hearing 2G case.

Venugopal, appearing for the CBI, submitted that the apex court had earlier barred any HC to entertain any plea in the 2G case. He claimed that Rs 800 crore kickback were paid to the Sun TV in the case.

Senior advocates C A Sundaram, Amrendra Saran and L N Rao, on their part, pleaded that the matter relating to the Aircel-Maxis deal was not related at all to the 2G scam case.

“Since chargesheet has been filed in the case and cognisance has already been taken, you should go to the special court and make your arguments before the special court, we would not interfere into the matter,” the bench said.

The defence counsel then pointed out that the SC had quashed similar summons issued against Sunil Bharti Mittal and Ravikant Ruia, promoters of Airtel and Essar respectively but the CBI counsel pointed out that cognisance was taken their case and the Aircel-Maxis case stood on different footing.

“We are bound by the judgments of this court. We can neither deviate nor differ. If we differ, we have to refer it to a larger bench,” the bench said.

The CBI had in August, last filed a chargesheet against the Marans.

The CBI had registered FIR in October, 2011 in the Aircel-Maxis case, wherein Maran has been accused of forcing Chennai-based telecom promoter C Sivasankaran to sell the stake in Aircel in 2006 to a Malaysian firm Maxis Group owned by Kuala Lumpur-based business tycoon T Ananda Krishnan.

Maran was the Telecom Minister between February 2004 and May 2007.