Swamy's plea not tenable in law: CBI tells court

Swamy's plea not tenable in law: CBI tells court

The CBI has filed its reply on Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy's plea seeking his appointment as public prosecutor in the 2G spectrum allocation scam case saying it was "not tenable" in law.

The agency on Wednesday told Special CBI Judge O P Saini that Swamy's prayer to appoint him as a public prosecutor is "not tenable" in law and his private complaint may be dealt separately.

"The said prayer of Swamy to appoint him as special public prosecutor and direct the CBI, the Enforcement Directorate and other prosecuting agencies of the government to assist him in conducting the case is, therefore, not tenable in law and is not worth acceptable," CBI said in its four-page reply.

The investigating agency emphasised that the Centre, as directed by the Supreme Court, has already appointed senior advocate U U Lalit as the special public prosecutor in the 2G spectrum case.

Regarding Swamy's plea that his private complaint should be clubbed with the CBI's case, the agency said, "Clubbing of both the cases is not in the interest of justice. The complaint of Swamy may be dealt with separately as per the law."

The matter has been put up for further proceedings for 18^th May as Swamy told the court that he needed some time to argue on this.

The Janata Party Chief had during the last hearing told the court that he should be associated in the case as he is willing to assist the CBI in a "formal way".

"I have to be associated in a formal way with the CBI's case. I will be happy to assist them. The court should give me a formal status and I do not think CBI would have any problem in this," Swamy had said.

In his complaint, he had made a three-fold prayer which included that his complaint be taken cognisance of and A Raja be summoned to take the case to its logical conclusion.

As per the second prayer, Swamy wanted the court to appoint him "as a deemed public prosecutor under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act."

Swamy also wanted the court's directions to agencies like CBI and Enforcement Directorate to assist him in conducting prosecution and in the further investigation into the scam.

During the last hearing, Swamy had said that although the CBI is probing the matter and has filed the charge sheet, his private complaint has wider ambit in some aspects.

"The scope of my application (private complaint) overlaps with the CBI case but in some cases its ambit is wider than that of the CBI's FIR," Swamy had said.

Swamy had said the CBI acted in the case after he filed the complaint to which the CBI prosecutor replied that it was the agency which filed the FIR in the case in October 2009 and Swamy came in the picture later on.

The JP chief had said he is willing to assist the CBI and Special Public Prosecutor U U Lalit in the case.

On this, the judge had asked Swamy whether he wanted his private complaint to be tagged with the CBI FIR, Swamy had said he do not have any problem but questioned about his status if his complaint is tagged with the FIR.

CBI prosecutor A K Singh had said they need at least two weeks time to respond to this and also told the court that Swamy should make a formal plea regarding this.