Special Public Prosecutor U U Lalit told CBI Judge O P
Saini that the opinion, which is now a part of the records,
cannot be used as a document of the CBI at the time of framing
of charges against the accused.
"It is true that the document (the report) is there on
record but then who has proved the document? What was the
basis when the opinion was formed and in what capacity,
the opinion was written. It is a subject of investigation.
"In the entire scheme of the CrPC, this report cannot
be accepted as a relied upon document," Lalit said.
"At best, the Law Ministry report can be taken as an
opinion of a department or an official," he said.
He said at this juncture, only three things are to be
considered by the court.
"Firstly, the documents submitted by the prosecution
which are relied upon by it. Secondly, such examination of the
accused as the court considers it necessary and thirdly, the
arguments of prosecution and defence counsel on this matter,"
the prosecutor said.
The court, on September 19, had directed the CBI to file
the Law ministry report.
Reliance Telecom Ltd (RTL) and Swan Telecom Private Ltd
(STPL), an alleged beneficiary of the scam, have been taking
the defence that they were not "associate" firms as RTL's
stake in STPL was below 10 per cent, as mandated under the
guidelines for the Unified Access Service (UAS) Licenses.
New Delhi: CBI on Monday told a Delhi court that
it cannot be forced to rely on an opinion of the Law Ministry
which said a firm should have more than 10 per cent stake in
another for being termed its associate.
First Published: Monday, September 26, 2011, 21:50