<p>The CBI on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that no criminality has been found in conversations of lobbyist Niira Radia with a cross sections of people, including politicians, industrialists, lawyers and journalists, recorded by the CBDT during 2008-09.</p>.<p>The conversations created huge political storm, showing gaping holes in decision making process, among others, prompting the top court to order CBI probe into it in 2013.</p>.<p>Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati submitted before a bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud, Hima Kohli and P S Narasimha that a sealed cover report was filed in 2015 by the investigating agency.</p>.<p>"No criminality was found during the investigation," she said, disclosing the outcome of the court-ordered probe and the case wasn’t taken up by the apex court in all these years.</p>.<p>The outcome of the investigation has also been forwarded to the departments concerned, she added.</p>.<p>The court asked the CBI to file the latest status report in October, when it would take up the matter again.</p>.<p>The case concerned a plea filed by industrialist Ratan Tata for probe into leak of the tapes, affecting his right to privacy.</p>.<p>NGO 'Centre for Public Interest Litigation' led by advocate Prashant Bhushan pleaded for disclosure of tapes in public interest.</p>.<p>On July 31, 2013, the CBI, represented by Additional Solicitor General Paras Kuhad, had confirmed criminality in the Radia tapes case. He had said that the agency was willing to start a probe and handed over a summary of the analysis of 5,800 tapped conversations.</p>.<p>The court had then ordered the CBI investigation into various contentious conversations, referring to the “deep-rooted malice” and “connivance” of private entrepreneurs with government officials for illegal gains.</p>.<p>The CBI subsequently lodged 14 preliminary enquires.</p>.<p>The instant case was last heard in April 2014, when the top court crystallized the issues -- right to privacy vis-a-vis the government; right to privacy vis-a-vis the media; and the right to information.</p>.<p>Tata had sought a probe into who had leaked the excerpts from the intercepts and also a mechanism in place to guard against such indiscriminate invasion into a citizen's privacy. </p>.<p>In August 2017, the apex court's nine-judge bench, in a landmark verdict, had said that privacy is a constitutional right. </p>
<p>The CBI on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that no criminality has been found in conversations of lobbyist Niira Radia with a cross sections of people, including politicians, industrialists, lawyers and journalists, recorded by the CBDT during 2008-09.</p>.<p>The conversations created huge political storm, showing gaping holes in decision making process, among others, prompting the top court to order CBI probe into it in 2013.</p>.<p>Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati submitted before a bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud, Hima Kohli and P S Narasimha that a sealed cover report was filed in 2015 by the investigating agency.</p>.<p>"No criminality was found during the investigation," she said, disclosing the outcome of the court-ordered probe and the case wasn’t taken up by the apex court in all these years.</p>.<p>The outcome of the investigation has also been forwarded to the departments concerned, she added.</p>.<p>The court asked the CBI to file the latest status report in October, when it would take up the matter again.</p>.<p>The case concerned a plea filed by industrialist Ratan Tata for probe into leak of the tapes, affecting his right to privacy.</p>.<p>NGO 'Centre for Public Interest Litigation' led by advocate Prashant Bhushan pleaded for disclosure of tapes in public interest.</p>.<p>On July 31, 2013, the CBI, represented by Additional Solicitor General Paras Kuhad, had confirmed criminality in the Radia tapes case. He had said that the agency was willing to start a probe and handed over a summary of the analysis of 5,800 tapped conversations.</p>.<p>The court had then ordered the CBI investigation into various contentious conversations, referring to the “deep-rooted malice” and “connivance” of private entrepreneurs with government officials for illegal gains.</p>.<p>The CBI subsequently lodged 14 preliminary enquires.</p>.<p>The instant case was last heard in April 2014, when the top court crystallized the issues -- right to privacy vis-a-vis the government; right to privacy vis-a-vis the media; and the right to information.</p>.<p>Tata had sought a probe into who had leaked the excerpts from the intercepts and also a mechanism in place to guard against such indiscriminate invasion into a citizen's privacy. </p>.<p>In August 2017, the apex court's nine-judge bench, in a landmark verdict, had said that privacy is a constitutional right. </p>
