2G Spectrum Scam Case Verdict: "Huge Scam Was Seen Where There Was None"

2G Scam Case: A Raja spent nearly one year in prison after his arrest in 2011.

New Delhi: Former telecom minister A Raja, DMK leader Kanimozhi and all other accused were today acquitted in the politically-sensitive 2G spectrum allocation scam cases by a special court in Delhi which held that the prosecution "miserably failed" to prove the charges. The judge OP Saini said the CBI could not prove that Mr Raja, along with officials from companies that won the licenses for telecom services, had conspired to receive kickbacks from the sale of phone permits, causing a loss of Rs. 1.76 lakh crore to the government.

Here are the big points from 2G verdict on A Raja and others:

I have absolutely no hesitation in holding that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove any charge against any of the accused, made in its well choreographed chargesheet.
The genesis of the case lies not so much in the actions of A Raja but in the action/inaction of others. There is no material on record to show that A Raja was mother lode of conspiracy in the instant case.
No evidence on the record produced before the court indicating any criminality in the acts allegedly committed by the accused persons relating to the fixation of cut-off date, manipulation of first come first served policy.
Non-understanding of issues led to a suspicion of grave wrongdoing where there was none. DoT could neither effectively communicate the issues to others nor others could understand the same. Issues got snowballed when media reports started appearing.
The lack of clarity in the policies as well as guidelines added to the confusion. The guidelines have been framed in such a technical language that the meaning of many terms are not clear even to DoT officers.
In the beginning, the prosecution started with the case with great enthusiasm and ardour. However, as the case progressed, it became highly cautious and guarded in its attitude making it difficult to find out as to what prosecution wanted to prove.
By the end, the quality of prosecution totally deteriorated and it became directionless and diffident.
However, on account of the various actions and inactions of the officials, as noted above, nobody believed the version of DoT and a huge scam was seen by everyone where there was none.
It is clear that complete facts were not placed before the then Hon'ble Prime Minister by his own office for which Sh. A. Raja cannot be faulted.
I may also add that for the last about seven years, on all working days, summer vacation included, I religiously sat in the open Court from 10 AM to 5 PM, awaiting for someone with some legally admissible evidence in his possession, but all in vain. Not a single soul turned up. This indicates that everybody was going by public perception created by rumour, gossip and speculation. However, public perception has no place in judicial proceedings.