New Delhi:

More than 12 years after it was delivered, the Centre on Monday moved the Supreme Court seeking modification of its verdict in the 2G spectrum case which said the State was duty bound to adopt the auction route while transferring or alienating the country’s natural resources.

In its judgement delivered on February 2, 2012, the Supreme Court had quashed 2G spectrum licences given to various firms during the tenure of A Raja as the telecom minister in January 2008.

On Monday, Attorney General R Venkataramani, appearing for the Centre, mentioned an interim application before a bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice J B Pardiwala.

While seeking urgent listing of the application, the top law officer told the bench that the plea seeks modification of the 2012 verdict as the Centre wanted to grant 2G spectrum licences in some cases.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan, who appeared for NGO Centre for Public Interest Litigation which was one of the petitioners on whose plea the February 2012 verdict was delivered, opposed the application and said the issue has been well-settled by the top court in its judgement that auction is the only mode for granting licences for natural resources like spectrum, the radio frequencies allocated to the mobile phone industry for communication over the airwaves.

“We will see, you please move an e-mail,” the CJI told Venkataramani.

In its 2012 judgement, the Supreme Court had said, “When it comes to alienation of scarce natural resources like spectrum etc, it is the burden of the State to ensure that a non-discriminatory method is adopted for distribution and alienation, which would necessarily result in protection of national/public interest”.

The top court had said in its view, a duly publicised auction conducted fairly and impartially was perhaps the best method for discharging this burden.

“In other words, while transferring or alienating the natural resources, the State is duty bound to adopt the method of auction by giving wide publicity so that all eligible persons can participate in the process,” it had said.

On March 22 this year, the Delhi High Court had admitted a CBI appeal against the acquittal of Raja and 16 others in the 2G spectrum allocation case, paving the way for hearing the matter six years after the plea was filed by the agency.

Admitting the Central Bureau of Investigation’s appeal, the high court had said there were “some contradictions” in the trial court’s judgment which require “deeper examination”.

A special court had on December 21, 2017, acquitted Raja, DMK MP Kanimozhi and others in the CBI and ED cases related to the 2G spectrum allocation.

On March 20, 2018, the CBI had approached the high court, challenging the special court’s judgment.

The CBI had alleged there was a loss of Rs 30,984 crore to the exchequer in allocation of licences for 2G spectrum which were scrapped by the top court on February 2, 2012. 

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

The Delhi High Court today admitted the CBI’s appeal challenging acquittal of former telecom minister A Raja, firms and others in the 2G spectrum allocation scam case.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma said on the basis of the material on record and the submissions made by the lawyers for the parties, a prima facie case is made out by the CBI which requires deeper examination and the appeal needs to be heard in detail.

“Leave to appeal is granted. List the appeal for hearing in May,” the judge said.

The high court passed the judgement on CBI’s “leave to appeal”, paving the way for dealing with the appeal on merits against the trial court’s verdict.

The appeal was filed by the CBI in 2018.

“Leave to appeal” is a formal permission granted by a court to a party to challenge a decision in a higher court.

The judge had reserved his decision on this aspect on March 14.

The special court had, on December 21, 2017, acquitted Mr Raja, DMK MP Kanimozhi and others in the CBI and ED cases related to the 2G scam.
 

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Patna:

After DMK leader A Raja’s remarks on ‘Jai Shri Ram’ and the idea of India, Rashtriya Janata Dal leader Tejashwi Yadav stated that the statement given by the DMK leader is personal adding the statement does not reflect India National Democratic Alliance view.

“This is his personal statement. It is not ours (INDIA Alliance),” said RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav

Bharatiya Janata Party IT cell head Amit Malviya on Tuesday slammed DMK’s A Raja and alleged that the DMK leader had called for “Balkanisation of India and derided Lord Ram, as well as made disparaging comments on Manipuris and questions the idea of India, as a nation.”

“The hate speeches from DMK’s stable continue unabated. After Udhayanidhi Stalin’s call to annihilate Sanatan Dharma, it is now A Raja who calls for balkanisation of India, derides Bhagwan Ram, makes disparaging comments on Manipuris and questions the idea of India, as a nation,” Malviya posted on X on Tuesday.

“Congress and other INDI Alliance partners are quiet. Rahul Gandhi, their putative Prime Ministerial candidate’s silence is eloquent,” he posted.

Senior BJP leader and Lok Sabha MP Ravi Shankar Prasad questioned the Congress leadership asking if they agreed with the DMK leader.

“He (A Raja) said that we will never accept ‘Jai Shri Ram’ and ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’… Do Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi and Mallikarjun Kharge agree with this? Will DMK use such derogatory comments against deities of other religions? We respect all religions” Ravi Shankar Prasad said.

Earlier, Amit Malviya posted the said speech of DMK’s A Raja made in Madurai with the translation saying, “India is not a nation. Understand this well. India is never a nation. One nation means one language, one tradition and one culture. Then only it is one nation. India is not a nation but a subcontinent. What’s the reason? Here, Tamil is one nation and one country. Malayalam is one language, one nation and one country. Oriya is a nation, a language and a country. All these nations make up India. So, India is not country it is a subcontinent. There are so many traditions and cultures. If you come to Tamil Nadu, there’s a culture. In Kerala, there’s another culture. In Delhi, there’s another culture. In Oriya, there’s another culture. Why in Manipur, as RS Bharathi said, they eat dog meat. Yes, it is true, they eat. That’s a culture. There’s nothing wrong. It’s all in our mind.”

“From the water tank, water comes to the kitchen. We will use the water in the kitchen. Same water from the water tank comes in toilet but we won’t use it from there. What’s the reason? We’re having a problem psychologically. Water is the same but there’s a difference from where it comes. We acknowledge both. That’s toilet and this is kitchen. Similarly, in Kashmir there’s a culture. Acknowledge it. In Manipur, people eat dog meat, and acknowledge it. If a community eats beef, what is your problem? Did they ask you to eat? So, unity in diversity. We’ve differences. Acknowledge it,” he posted.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

Bharatiya Janata Party IT cell head Amit Malviya on Tuesday slammed DMK’s A Raja and alleged that the DMK leader had called for “Balkanisation of India and derided Lord Ram, as well as made disparaging comments on Manipuris and questions the idea of India, as a nation.”

“The hate speeches from DMK’s stable continue unabated. After Udhayanidhi Stalin’s call to annihilate Sanatan Dharma, it is now A Raja who calls for balkanisation of India, derides Bhagwan Ram, makes disparaging comments on Manipuris and questions the idea of India, as a nation,” Malviya posted on X on Tuesday.

“Congress and other INDI Alliance partners are quiet. Rahul Gandhi, their putative Prime Ministerial candidate’s silence is eloquent,” he posted

Malviya posted the said speech of DMK’s A Raja made in Madurai with the translation saying, “India is not a nation. Understand this well. India is never a nation. One nation means one language, one tradition and one culture. Then only it is one nation. India is not a nation but a subcontinent. What’s the reason? Here, Tamil is one nation and one country. Malayalam is one language, one nation and one country. Oriya is a nation, a language and a country. All these nations make up India. So, India is not a country it is a subcontinent. There are so many traditions and cultures. If you come to Tamil Nadu, there’s a culture. In Kerala, there’s another culture. In Delhi, there’s another culture. In Oriya, there’s another culture. Why in Manipur, as RS Bharathi said, they eat dog meat. Yes, it is true, they eat. That’s a culture. There’s nothing wrong. It’s all in our mind.”

“From the water tank, water comes to the kitchen. We will use the water in the kitchen. The same water from the water tank comes in the toilet but we won’t use it from there. What’s the reason? We’re having a problem psychologically. Water is the same but there’s a difference from where it comes. We acknowledge both. That’s the toilet and this is the kitchen. Similarly, in Kashmir, there’s a culture. Acknowledge it. In Manipur, people eat dog meat and acknowledge it. If a community eats beef, what is your problem? Did they ask you to eat? So, unity in diversity. We’ve differences. Acknowledge it,” he posted.

In his speech, the DMK leader also said that he could not accept the BJP’s ideology.

“If you say it’s this God, this is Jai Sri Ram, this is Bharat mata ki jai, then we and Tamil Nadu will never accept Bharat Matha and Jai Shriram… I don’t believe in Ramayanam….” 

Earlier on Monday, the Supreme Court questioned the Tamil Nadu Sports Minister and DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin over his remarks calling for the eradication of ‘Sanatana Dharma’ and told him that he is “not a layman but a minister”.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta told Stalin’s lawyer that the minister is not a layman but a minister and he should know the consequences of his remarks.

The bench frowned upon Udhayanidhi Stalin saying he should have known the consequences before making remakes.

“You abuse your rights under freedom of speech and expression and right to freedom of religion and then come to the Supreme Court for protection under Article 32? Do you not know the consequences of what you said?,” asked the bench.

The DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin had made remarks comparing ‘Sanatana Dharma’ to diseases like ‘malaria’ and ‘dengue’ while advocating for its elimination on grounds that it was rooted in the caste system and historical discrimination.

His remarks triggered a massive political controversy across the country. It led to several criminal complaints being filed against him.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)