2G: Spoke to Hari Nair before statement to CBI: Sethuraman

AN Sethuraman, president of the ADA (Anil Dhirubhai Ambani) Group, the second prosecution witness to depose in the 2G trial, told the special CBI court today that he spoke to Hari Nair, one of the three top Reliance officials accused in the case, before he gave his statement to the CBI between January and March 2011.

It was the fourth straight day of cross-examination for Sethuraman in the 2G trial.

“On the day my statement was recorded, some arrests had already taken place and some of my colleagues had also been already examined by the CBI. I do not remember the name of any of my colleagues whose statement was recorded prior to my statement. I had discussion only with Hari Nair,” Sethuraman told the court.

Defence lawyer Majid Memon, who was cross-examining the witness, was quick to point out that he had told the court only yesterday that before he gave his statement he had discussions with some of his “colleagues” whose statement had been recorded by the CBI. The obvious contradiction in his two statements forced Sethuraman to clarify his statement. “The word ‘colleagues’ may be read in singular form in my yesterday’s statement. It is incorrect to suggest that I am changing my statement today under instructions.”

Asked specifically by Memon if he had been told by the CBI to depose in a ‘particular manner’, Sethuraman said it would be incorrect to suggest so. “The CBI official did say to me to follow whatever I had earlier stated in my statement.”

The curious case of Anand Bhatt

Sethuraman, during his cross-examination by AH Ponda, defence lawyer for accused Hari Nair, reiterated that he had obtained legal opinion from Anand Bhatt, partner in the law firm Wadia Ghandy and an expert in corporate law, on phone before he signed the applications for UASL (Unified Access Service License) submitted by him on behalf of Swan Telecom between January and March 2007.

Anand Bhatt was killed during the Mumbai 26/11 terrorist attack.

“In March 2007, I had telephonic conversation on two to three occasions with Anand Bhatt prior to submitting the applications for UAS licences. It is correct that in one such discussion, Bhatt told me that he had personally filled up applications and undertakings and assured me about their correctness and asked me to go ahead with the signing the same,” he said.

Sethuraman further told the court that Bhatt was a director with M/s Swan Capital (P) Limited in January, 2007, and a director with M/s Swan Telecom (P) Limited in March 2007. Swan Capital (P) Ltd., was renamed Swan Telecom (P) Ltd., between January and March 2007.

This is the second time that Sethuraman has told the court about signing the UASL applications on the ’telephonic instructions’ of Bhatt.  Read more here.

However, the name of Anand Bhatt finds no mention at all in his statement to the CBI.

Sethuraman also told the court that Anil Ambani was neither chairman nor director of Swan Capital (P) Limited.

Court issues notice to CBI

In the light of the deposition of Sethuraman on the manner in which he was called by the CBI to their office on 9 November, prior to the trial, the defence filed an application to issue necessary orders to the CBI. The application submitted by defence lawyer Majid Memon appealed to the special CBI court to “call the director of CBI to prevent unhealthy practice of calling witness unofficially and tampering with evidence.”

The court issued notice to the CBI to respond the application on 23 November.

Application to alter charge

In another development, defence lawyer Vijay Aggarwal filed an application on behalf of RK Chandolia, former private secretary to A Raja, Asif Balwa, one of the directors of Kusegaon Fruits and Vegetables, and Shahid Balwa, Swan Telecom promoter, for “alteration of charge framed against the applicant/accused” on October 22, 2011.