CBI pulled up for Finance Ministry’s delays in providing Sanction for Prosecution in Aircel-Maxis scam

Is it the fault of CBI if the FM or his Ministry delays sanction for prosecution? Who is shielding Chidambaram?

Is it the fault of CBI if the FM or his Ministry delays sanction for prosecution? Who is shielding Chidambaram?
Is it the fault of CBI if the FM or his Ministry delays sanction for prosecution? Who is shielding Chidambaram?

The 2G Court on Monday pulled up the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) due to the Centre’s delay in providing Sanction for Prosecution against four Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers in the Aircel-Maxis case, who are co-accused with former Finance Minister (FM) P Chidambaram and his son Karti. Admonishing the CBI, the 2G Special Court judge Saini directed the agency to provide Sanction for Prosecution by November 26, the next hearing of the case. The Judge asked the CBI, as to why they submitted a charge sheet, while delaying the necessary Sanction for Prosecution against the four accused and cautioned that he may take appropriate steps in the next hearing, if the Sanction from the Central Government is not submitted.

As per the current rules, in Aircel-Maxis case, as the officers then belonged to the Finance Ministry, FM Arun Jaitley has to recommend the CBI’s request for Sanction for Prosecution and then the Department of Personnel (DoPT) under Prime Minister Narendra Modi has to approve it. Otherwise, the charge sheet against the tainted former FM will become stale. Is someone trying to create delays to save Chidambaram?

Who are the co-accused IAS officers?

Who are the four IAS officers co-accused with Chidambaram and son?

  1. Former Finance Secretary Ashok Jha
  2. Former Finance Secretary Ashok Chawla, currently serving as the Chairman of National Stock Exchange
  3. Kumar Sanjay Krishnan belonging to the Assam Cadre
  4. Deepak Kumar Singh belonging to the Bihar cadre

According to CBI’s charge sheet, these officers then working in the Finance Ministry were part and parcel of Chidambaram’s dubious and illegal approval given to the Malaysian firm Maxis to take over mobile phone operator Aircel.

“You (CBI) should not have filed the charge sheet. It is only increasing the pendency of the court. A lot of time of the court has been wasted due to this,” Special Judge O P Saini said.

The agency had on July 19 filed a charge sheet against the Congress leader, his son Karti, ten individuals including public servants and six companies as accused in the case[1].

The judge allowed the CBI’s request for grant of sometime after senior advocate Sonia Mathur, representing the agency, informed the judge that sanctions are awaited.

“If the sanctions are not received, appropriate actions will be taken,” the court said.

“Granting of sanctions is under active consideration of the government,” Mathur said.

Due to the delay by the Central Government, CBI is starting to cut a sorry figure before the Court. Why is the delay happening?

It appears as though either the FM Arun Jaitley or the Finance Secretary Hasmukh Adhia has not yet recommended the CBI’s request. The million dollar question is why this delay for the past two months, as CBI applied for it before filing the charge sheet  in 2G Court on July 29.

It is time for Prime Minister Narendra Modi to interfere into this matter, where many crooks are trying to save their buddy tainted and corrupt Chidambaram.


[1] Finally crooked P Chidambaram caught under Prevention of Corruption Act in Aircel-Maxis scamJul 19, 2018, PGurus.com

We are a team of focused individuals with expertise in at least one of the following fields viz. Journalism, Technology, Economics, Politics, Sports & Business. We are factual, accurate and unbiased.
Team PGurus


  1. In the 2G Case, the Supreme Court has observed in a petition moved by Dr Swamy against UPA Govt headed by Dr Manmohan Singh, “the Public authorities are ought to acknowledge and take remedial action WITHIN THREE MONTHS from the date of receipt of any written request / application. In the Aircel Maxis case, the CBI has filed charge sheet against PC/KC and other ten people including four senior finance ministry officials before filing charge sheet on 29-07-2018. As per SC ruling in Dr Swamy’s 2-G case, the requisite permission from FM is ought to be granted on or before 29-10-2018. Next date of hearing in patiala 2-G special Court is 26-11-2018. CBI should show / file the copies of their application addressed to and submitted with FM, north block, New Delhi, seeking SANCTION to proceed against the then four alleged Finance Ministry officials. It would suffice if CBI produces before Judge O P Saini in the 2-G Spl Court, the certified copy of application made to Fin Ministry. So the delay cannot be linked or attributed to CBI. The reasons for delays solely rests with FM-AJ & FS- Dr Hasmukh Adhia. The CBI cannot order FM to grant sanctions for prosecution of four alleged public servants, who worked in Fin Min then. It is their handicap. The 2-G Spl Court should understand CBi’s difficulties and direct the Government to give requisite NOCs for proceeding against the then allegedly corrupt Fin Min officials within ten days. Trust the Govt would grant the requisite SANCTION before 26th Nov.’2018 with, without and / or inspite of Shri Arun Jaitley FM

  2. Not a very difficult question.It is certain that Shakuni and Mr Modi are being blackmailed by Gandu/PC thru the IAS Lobby and 56″ has no guts to take any action other then giving BHASHAN.

  3. Ultimate responsibility lies with none other than PM Narendra Modi. This is clever attempt to derail the trail against Chidambaram. Arun Jaitley is a crook and he will do all nonsense to save his partner Chidambaram. Modi is responsible for allowing Jaitley’s crooked designs

  4. This is called Checkmate in the game of power chess. If sanction is given, Swamiji is winner. If sanction is not given, Modis intentions will be exposed.Game over, unless of course PC pulls out a Trump card and receives reprieve from his judicial friends.

  5. If the sanction is not given by the concerned authority then it is necessary to make abetment charges against those authorities who are supporting the accused irrespective of their status in the administrative hierarchy.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here