CBI for custodial interrogation of Maran in Telephone exchange case

Loriety

Editor

posted on 9 years ago — updated on 1 second ago

29
views

Taking on record the affidavit of CBI, the bench also comprising Justice V Gopala Gowda deferred the hearing on the plea of Maran to November 27 and asked the DMK leader to file his response by the next date of hearing.

New Delhi: DMK leader Dayanidhi Maran is not cooperating in the alleged telephone exchange case and his custodial interrogation was necessary "to ascertain the actual usage" of telephone lines for purported benefit of family venture SUN TV, the CBI told the Supreme Court on Friday. "The custodial examination of Mr. Maran is required to ascertain the actual usage of these lines for the benefit of SUN TV which is in his exclusive knowledge.

"There is evidence of forging/tampering and manipulation of records and custodial interrogation is necessary to ascertain the modus operandi of the usage of the illegal telephone exchange, to ascertain the actual usage and consequential loss to the public exchequer," the affidavit filed before a bench headed by justice T S Thakur said.

"The petitioner was granted one opportunity to cooperate with investigation which he failed resulting into rejection of anticipatory bail...the petitioner was examined but he refused to co-operate with the investigation and was evasive to many questions. He gave contradictory replies during his examination," the affidavit said.

The investigating agency further said there was evidence on record to substantiate the allegations that Maran in criminal conspiracy with the CGMs of BSNL "illegally" obtained more than 750 telephone numbers under service category. "No approval of DOT was obtained wilfully for any of these connections," it said.

The apex court had earlier extended the stay on a Madras High Court order cancelling the bail of Maran in the case. The apex court on August 12 had sought CBI's response on Maran's plea challenging the High Court order and questioned its decision to arrest him in a case registered in 2013. Maran had moved the apex court challenging the Madras High Court's decision to cancel his bail and asking him to surrender in a case.