The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Monday withdrew from a Delhi court its plea seeking issuance of Letters Rogatory (LRs) to Malaysia and Mauritius in the Aircel-Maxis deal case, in which former Telecom Minister Dayanidhi Maran among others has been named in the CBI charge sheet.
The ED told special judge O.P. Saini, who is exclusively dealing with the 2G scam-related cases, that its application pending before the court may be “dismissed as withdrawn” and it should be given liberty to file fresh plea, if needed, in this regard at a later stage.
“It is submitted by N.K. Matta, special public prosecutor, that application may be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh one, if so desired by the applicant (ED). Prayer allowed. Application is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh one, if deemed fit by the applicant,” the court said.
The ED’s move came days after CBI, on August 29, had filed a charge sheet in the case against eight accused, including four firms, alleging that Dayanidhi Maran had received a bribe of over Rs. 700 crore for purportedly coercing Chennai-based telecom promoter C. Sivasankaran to sell his company Aircel to Malaysia-based Maxis.
Besides the Maran brothers, the CBI has named Malaysian business tycoon T. Ananda Krishnan, Malaysian national Augustus Ralph Marshall, who headed Maxis’ U.K.-based subsidiary ASTRO All Asia Network, and four firms, including Sun Direct TV Pvt. Ltd. and Malaysia’s Maxis Communication Berhad, as accused in the case.
The other two companies named by CBI in the charge sheet are ASTRO All Asia Network PLC and South Asia Entertainment Holding Ltd., which was allegedly managed by the Marans.
They have been charged for the offences punishable under section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC and under relevant provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Aircel-Maxis case: A timeline
The Aircel-Maxis deal came under the scanner after Aircel owner C. Sivasankaran > lodged a complaint with the Central Bureau of Investigation in April-May 2011 alleging that he was pressurised to sell his stakes to Maxis.
In September 29, 2011, the Arbitral Tribunal > rejected Mr. Sivasankaran’s allegation regarding breach of obligations on the part of buyers in undertaking an IPO of Aircel. The tribunal directed him to pay Maxis’s legal costs of $7.9 million, of which at least $1.4 million was paid. The award was not challenged.
In October 2011, the CBI filed a case alleging that Mr. Sivasankaran, who had applied for spectrum licence, was > coerced into selling his company to Maxis. It is later alleged that the Maxis Group, which bought 74 per cent stakes in Aircel in March 2006, invested Rs.742 crore in Sun Direct between 2007 and 2009.
In May 2014, the CBI told the Supreme Court that there was difference of opinion between the CBI Director and the prosecution regarding filing of the charge sheet. On reference, the Attorney General opined that there was enough prosecutable evidence.
Maxis Communications Berhad on July 25 urged Finance Minister Arun Jaitley that it be treated in a fair manner, citing a contrary opinion by two retired Chief Justices of India.
The CBI on August 29 > filed charge sheet against former Telecom Minister Dayanidhi Maran and his brother Kalanidhi Maran; T. Ananda Krishnan, owner of Malaysian company Maxis; Ralph Marshall, a senior executive of the Maxis Group, and four companies, including the Sun Direct TV Pvt. Ltd.
