Industrialist Nusli Wadia has strongly opposed a plea for in-camera recording of his statement in the 25-year old case of murder conspiracy against him. Prime accused Kirti Ambani, a former executive of Reliance Industries who reported directly to Mukesh Ambani, had moved the application seeking the in-camera recording.
In a reply filed before a Special CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) Court here recently, Mr. Wadia has said that “it is a well-established principle of law that all trials, particularly criminal trials, should be conducted in full public view, save and except in rare and exceptional cases.”
“The only ground disclosed is that accused no.1 [Mr. Ambani] is concerned about the prejudice that may be caused to his former employers. Surprisingly, his former employers [Reliance Industries] ... have made no grievance about any prejudice likely to be caused to them by this witness’s evidence unless the instant application has been filed at their instance,” Mr. Wadia’s reply has stated.
A few months ago, Mr. Wadia had sought the court’s permission to record his statement in the case where four persons were arrested for conspiring to kill him. In his application, Mr. Wadia had stated that he wanted to shed light on the circumstances of intense corporate rivalry during that time, which might have led to the conspiracy.
The plea was allowed by the CBI court despite severe opposition by the prime accused.
Mr. Ambani had thereafter moved the Bombay High Court seeking to restrain Mr. Wadia from recording his statement. But the High Court too had refused to grant any relief to Mr. Ambani, giving the green signal to Mr. Wadia to depose before the CBI Court.
Thereafter, Mr. Ambani had moved an application before the CBI Court last month seeking in-camera recording of Mr Wadia's statement. He had said that allowing Mr. Wadia to speak in the open court might harm the reputation of Reliance Industries.
‘Not bona fide ’ “I am apprehensive that the application [filed by Mr. Wadia seeking permission to record his statement] filed was not bona fide but only to rake up issues and matters which in my humble submission are not relevant to this case, but to cause injury and harm to the reputation of my erstwhile employer and prejudice to my case,” Mr. Ambani’s application had stated.
