Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: 2G SCAM CASE in Essar Teleholdings Ltd vs Regr.Gen.Delhi High Court & Ors on 1 July, 2013Matching Fragments
SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J.
Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 21st December, 2011 passed by the Special Judge, Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi taking cognizance against the petitioners, they have preferred these writ petitions challenging the said order dated 21st December, 2011, Administrative Order dated 15th March, 2011 passed by the Delhi High Court and Notification dated 28th March, 2011 passed by the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (for short ‘NCT of Delhi’) designating Mr. Om Prakash Saini as Special Judge to undertake the trial of cases in relation to all matters pertaining to 2G Spectrum case (commonly known as 2G Scam case) exclusively. One of the writ petitions has been filed by an individual and two other writ petitions have been preferred by two Companies who are all accused in 2G Scam case.
7. Pursuant to the abovesaid order the Government of N.C.T. of Delhi exercising its power under Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short “the PC Act”) by notification dated 28.3.2011 designated Mr. Om Prakash Saini as Special Judge to undertake the trial of cases in relation to all matters pertaining to 2G Scam case exclusively.
8. Administrative side of the Delhi High Court, thereafter, issued an allocation list on 1.4.2011 whereby Mr. Om Prakash Saini (P.C. Act) (CBI-4) PHC was designated as Special Judge in a new court to deal with matters pertaining to the 2G Scam cases exclusively.
72. The aforesaid facts and circumstances constitute commission of offences, during 2007-08, punishable u/s 120-B IPC r/w 420 IPC, and substantive offence u/s 420 IPC, against accused persons, viz. Ravi N. Ruia, Anshuman Ruia, Vikash Saraf, I.P. Khaitan, Ms. Kiran Khaitan, M/s. Loop Telecom Ltd. (erstwhile M/s. Shippingstop Dot Com India Pvt.Ltd.), M/s. Loop Mobile India Ltd. (BPL M/s. Mobile Communications Limited) and M/s. Teleholdings Ltd. Accused persons were not arrested during investigation.” From the aforesaid second charge-sheet it is clear that the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioners in the course of 2G Scam Cases. For the said reason they have been made accused in the 2G Scam Case.
Admittedly, the co-accused of 2G Scam case charged under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act can be tried only by the Special Judge. The petitioners are co-accused in the said 2G Scam case. In this background Section 220 of Cr.P.C. will apply and the petitioners though accused of different offences i.e. under Section 420/120-B IPC, which alleged to have been committed in the course of 2G Spectrum transactions, under Section 223 of Cr. P.C. they may be charged and can be tried together with the other co-accused of 2G Scam cases.