CBI gives CLEAN CHIT to Niira Radia, says 'no criminality found in 5800 conversations'

New Delhi: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that no criminality has been found following an investigation into the intercepted conversations of the corporate lobbyist Niira Radia with some politicians, businessmen, media persons, and others. Taking note of the submissions of the probe agency, the top court directed it to file a status report on the matter.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the CBI, also told a three-judge bench headed by Justice D Y Chandrachud that petition filed by industrialist Ratan Tata seeking protection of the right to privacy  given the emergence of the Radia tapes may be disposed of in the light of the right to privacy judgement of the apex court.

"I must inform you that the CBI was directed by your lordship to investigate all these conversations. Fourteen preliminary inquiries were registered and the report was placed before your lordships in a sealed cover. No criminality was found in those. Also, now there are phone-tapping guidelines in place," Bhati said.

The law officer said nothing remains in the matter after the privacy judgement. The bench, also comprising Justices Hima Kohli and P S Narasimha, said it will hear the matter after the Dussehra vacation as there is a Constitution Bench next week.

"Meanwhile, the CBI may file an updated status report," said the bench and posted the matter for the next hearing on October 12.

At the outset, the counsel, appearing for Tata, sought an adjournment. Tata filed the petition in 2011. He had contended that the release of the tapes amounted to infringement on his right to privacy.

The apex court in 2013 directed a CBI inquiry into six issues arising out of the analysis of corporate lobbyist Niira Radia's taped conversations. 

In August 2017, the apex court, in a landmark verdict, had said that privacy is a constitutional right. Nine judges were unanimous in their finding, however they cited different reasons for their conclusion.