2G scam: HC rejects plea against Tata, Ambani

Delhi high court on Wednesday refused to entertain a petition seeking a direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation to make Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group chairman Anil Ambani, Tata Group chief Ratan Tata, corporate lobbyist Niira Radia and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam chief M Karunanidhi's wife Dayalu Ammal, as accused in 2G case.

"It is a rubbish petition. If I find that we you (petitioner) have tried to interfere with the investigation then you may be in bigger trouble," Justice Ajit Bharihoke said.

. . .

"Either you withdraw your petition or argue at your own peril," he said, forcing the petitioner M Furquan, a Delhi-based scribe, to withdraw his plea.

"The petition is dismissed as withdrawn," Justice Bharihoke said in his order.

During the brief hearing, the court refused to grant adjournment and asked the counsel for Furquan to argue the case straight away.

It also did not grant the petitioner the liberty to approach 'the Supreme Court or other judicial forum' with his plea to seek direction to the CBI for broadening the ambit of the ongoing probe in the 2G case.

. . .

Earlier, a special CBI court, trying the case, had refused to entertain the plea saying it was frivolous.

The CBI court had also imposed a cost of Rs 10,000 each on Furquan and Ghaziabad's scrap dealer Dharmender Pandey for filing complaints in this regard.

"The applications are not only devoid of any substance but are also contrary to the law and deserve to be dismissed with heavy cost as application after application of this nature are being filed by third parties resulting into loss of precious time of the court.

. . .

"Both applications are dismissed, subject to nominal cost of Rs 10,000 each," special CBI judge O P Saini had said.

The complainants had told the special court that the CBI was 'deliberately' suppressing the facts against Ambani and 'overlooking' the role of Tata and Radia in the scam.

Furquan and Pandey had also alleged in their separate complaints that the CBI was not looking into the matter and was trying to protect them.