2G case: Tempers run high on day one of cross-questioning Mathur

Day one of the cross-examination of key prosecution witness in the 2G spectrum case DS Mathur, former telecom secretary who served under A Raja, saw tempers fly and special CBI judge OP Saini telling the defence not to raise their voice in the courtroom. The former telecom secretary’s response during cross-examination that he did not know whether a key objective of the government was to increase tele-density elicited a sharp reaction from Raja’s lawyer Sushil Kumar and then Raja himself. [caption id=“attachment_272864” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“Reuters”]  [/caption] “I am discrediting this witness 100 percent. He cannot hide behind ‘I don’t remember’,” shot back senior advocate Sushil Kumar. The outburst saw Raja, who was constantly assisting his lawyer during the cross-examination, trying to calm him down. But soon Raja too reacted to Mathur’s loss of memory saying, “The witness remembers all the file notings but he doesn’t remember national policy, which as a telecom secretary he should have been well aware of.” On being shown a copy of the National Telecom Policy 1999, Mathur then admitted one of the objectives was to increase tele-density in rural areas that “he must have been aware of the objectives of mentioned in the NTP-1999 when he was telecom secretary.” After a tense beginning, the cross-examination seemed to proceed to Raja’s satisfaction. Mathur told the court that according to the 2001 Guidelines for Issue of License for Basic Services spectrum was to be allocated on a first-come, first-served basis. He told the court that while he was not aware if it was for the first time that the Department of Telecom (DoT) had invoked the principle, the definition of ‘first-come first-served’ was “not defined anywhere” in the guidelines. Mathur’s attention was then drawn to TRAI’s recommendations on unified licensing (dated 27 October, 2003) that stated that TRAI “was not in favour of bidding process for fixing benchmark for migration to unified licensing regime” and that it was in favour of treating existing entry fee of the fourth cellular operator as the entry fee in the new unified access licensing regime. Mathur, on being shown a cabinet note, told the court that a GoM (group of ministers) on telecom matters (constituted on 10 September, 2003) had proposed that the TRAI recommendations on unified licensing (referred to above) be accepted. Reading from that cabinet note, Mathur said, “It is correct that it was proposed that the DoT may be authorised to finalise the details of implementation with the approval of the Minister of Communication and Information Technology, in this regard including the calculation of entry fee depending upon the date of payment based on the principle given by the TRAI in its recommendations. It is correct that as per this note Finance Ministry was to be consulted for spectrum pricing formula…” Mathur was then shown a note by the Director (LF) which dealt with issue of letters of intent for new unified access licenses. Reading out from the note, Mathur stated “…the spectrum is to be issued allotted subject to availability. This in effect would imply that an applicant who comes first will be granted spectrum first, so it will result in grant of licences on first-come, first-served basis. This draft note was approved by then minister dated 24 November, 2003.” The telecom minister at that time was Arun Shourie. The cross-examination was not without some lighter moments. When the Defence asked Mathur whether he was aware that the Prime Minister was chairman of the Planning Commission, the judge said “everybody is aware of that.” To which Raja’s lawyer retorted, “Everybody knows I’m (Raja) innocent and yet I am facing trial.” Mathur, who was telecom secretary between July 2006 and December 2007, had on Monday told the court that on seeing Raja’s order (dated 2 November, 2007) advancing the cut-off date for receipt of new applications for unified access service licences, he felt the decision “may be considered arbitrary and it may give rise to legal complications later on.” He had also stated that he had “personally told him (Raja) that the decision needs to be reconsidered.” Raja’s cross-examination of Mathur will continue to tomorrow.