Download 2 - Central Bureau of Investigation

AG not only sawvetted also: CBIVahanvati proposedchanges to statusreport, says affidavitPIONEER NEWS SERVICENotjust the Law Minister, but theAttorney General too saw the statusreport in the coal allocation scam beforethe CE! presented the same to the SupremeCourt in a sealed cover on March 8. Thislatest revelation, which forms part of theCE! affidavit to be filed in the apex courton Monday, could put Attorney GeneralGE Vahanyati in serious trouble. The AGhad told the court that he did not see thereport despiteattending a meeting chairedthe Law Minister to discuss the report withthe CE! director.In addition, the contents of the latestaffidavit discussedby the CE! director withCR! special counsel UULailt mayalso Indicatethe changes proposed by the LawMinister. According to sources, CR!Director Ranjit Sinha is expected to pointout in his affidavit that the Law Ministerhad proposeda 'dilution' oflanguage in thedocument. The agency may Indicate thatthe objection of the Minister was withregard to a final view being taken by theagency onrules fbr allocationof coal blocks.One ofthe petitioners in the coal scamPIL, Common Cause, had informed thecourt on April 30, thelast date ofhearing,that the changesproposed In the reportconcerned shielding of three companies.The bench had takenserious exception to thischarge and wérned the CS!of taking an "adverse view"of the same. But the moredamning aspect of CBI affidavitcouldbe the commenton the AG, Sinha's affidavitmay acknowledgethe fact that the AG hada greater role to play thanmere seeing of the report. Accordingto sources, the AG too 'proposed" changesto the status report, after having gonethrough it.Appearing In court on the previoushearing in the coalgate, the AG referred tothe March 5 meeting where the CBIdirector shared the probe report with theLaw Minister and said, "I agree I was sittingtheret but Ihave never seen the draft(report):' a comment that may haunt himon his next appearance in thecourt onMay8. Already, sufficient embarrassment wascaused to the AG following theresignationof law offlter Harm Raval who appearedfor CEI in this case. Raval, whowrote a letter to the AG and theLaw Ministe1prior to tisresignation had accusedthe AG of lying to thecourt on having seen theCBI report.Giving details aboutthe meeting with the LawMinister,bval had said"At the said meeting,during the course ofdiscussions, the draftof only one of status reports of thepreliminary enquiries was shown to theLaw Minister and was perused by him aswell as by you (AG). Certain suggestionswere made, Includingby you, to the CBI,some of which were accepted:'Continuedon PageRelated report on P5AG not only saw,vetted also: , CBIThe -From Page 1 March 12%y stating that theletter further revealed, status report was not shared"You will recall that as you with the political executive.wanted to leave, to attend Howeyer. on the court's querycourt.., other status report ofwhether the CRI CR1 Manual pertheinvestigations of the nine mited agency to share-theregular cases (in the coal block probe reports with Lawscam) were' requested to be Minister or any other offidal ofshown to you in the evening... Government, the agency jsIn compliSce ofthe above, thelikely to justify its act by ugCRI CR1 officials broughtthe drafts,geslingthat its Manual is silentwhich were perused and settledin this regard.by you. Sir, I was present in Besides, the affidavit ofyour residential office?':;The CRI CR1 affidavit is expecte4to confirm this fact and alsopoint out to the court that 'ASGItaval had misled the court onCRI CR1 would also name the twoJoint Secretaries in the PMOand Coal Ministry with whomtheCRI theCR1 shared the probereportas desiredby them.-