New Delhi

Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, industrialist Kumar Mangalam Birla, ex-coal secretary P C Parakh and three others were today summoned as accused by a special court in a coal scam case pertaining to allocation of Talabira-II coal block in Odisha in 2005 and asked to appear before it on April 8.

Special CBI Judge Bharat Parashar summoned the six accused on April 8 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 409 (criminal breach of trust by public servant, or by banker, merchant or agent) of the IPC and under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA).

Besides these three, the court also summoned M/s Hindalco, its officials Shubhendu Amitabh and D Bhattacharya as accused in the case.

If convicted, the accused are liable to be sentenced for a maximum of life imprisonment.

The case pertains to allocation of Talabira II coal block in Odisha to M/s Hindalco in 2005, when the then Prime Minister Singh was holding the coal portfolio.

CBI, in its FIR, had named Parakh, Birla, M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd and other unknown persons for alleged offences under Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC and under provisions of the PCA.

However, the agency had later on filed a closure report in the court, which had refused to accept it.

The court, in its December 16 last year order, had directed CBI to examine former Prime Minister Singh and some top officials of then Prime Minister Office (PMO), including Singh’s then Principal Secretary T K A Nair and then private secretary B V R Subramanyam.

Parakh and Hindalco have denied any wrongdoing.

Pronouncing the order, the judge said, “I am taking cognisance of offences under Sections 120B, 409 of the IPC and under Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d)(3) of PCA against six accused, M/s Hindalco, Shubhendu Amitabh, D Bhattacharya, Kumar Mangalam Birla, P C Parakh and Dr Manmohan Singh.”

Section 13(1)(c) of PCA relates to a public servant dishonestly misappropriating property entrusted to him or allowing any other person to do so.

Section 13(1)(d)(3) relates to a public servant obtaining any pecuniary advantage for any person without any public interest.

Court observations

Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s approval to allocate coal block to HINDALCO prima facie “facilitated windfall profits” to the private firm resulting in loss to state-owned PSU Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd (NLC), a special court observed today.

The court noted that approval given by Singh, who was also the Minister of Coal at that time, was in “violation” of the established procedure.

It also said that Singh had kept the coal portfolio with him and thus “prima facie he cannot claim that being Prime Minister he could not be expected to personally look into the minute details of each and every case.”

“His (Singh’s) approval in violation of the established procedure and already approved guidelines clearly resulted in defeating the efforts of NLC to establish a 2000 MW Power Plant in Odisha. His action thus prima facie resulted in loss to NLC which was a PSU and facilitated windfall profits to a private company i.e. M/s HINDALCO,” the judge said.

The court also observed that “compromising” the status of Talabira-III coal block, which was reserved for PSU and was with Coal India’s arm, Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd (MCL), and allocating excess coal to HINDALCO again “prima facie crops up as an incriminating circumstance against him (Singh).”

Detailing the role of Singh, the court said he had allowed the matter pertaining to allocation of Talabira-II coal block to be “reopened” even though he himself had permitted approval of minutes of 25th Screening Committee recommending allocation of allocating the said block to NLC.

“The repeated reminders from PMO, written as well as telephonic, to MOC (Ministry of Coal) to expeditiously process the matter in view of the letters received from Kumar Mangalam Birla also prima facie indicate the extra undue interest shown by the PMO in the matter,” it said.

While holding that Singh cannot take the defence that being Prime Minister he could not be expected to personally look into the minute details of each and every case, the judge said, “I may, however, state that the present case stands on a different footing as here Dr Manmohan Singh did not act in the capacity of a Prime Minister but as a Minster of Coal.” (More) PTI ABA MNL RKS VMN

The court also noted that a Prime Minister of a country cannot personally look into minute details of each and every case and has to depend upon his advisors and other officers.

“Moreover as regard the officers and advisors working in the PMO to assist him, I may mention that their role has also been discussed in detail by me and I may also state that the role of various officers in the PMO or even in MOC has also not been prima facie completely above board,” it said.

The judge said Singh had approved a proposal put forth by then Coal Secretary P C Parakh, a co-accused, to accommodate HINDALCO in Talabira II and III coal block while ignoring the “words of caution” put-forth by two PMO officials K V Pratap and Javed Usmani.

“Also the omission to not to refer the request of M/s HINDALCO to the screening committee in accordance with the established procedure being followed till that time again prima facie shows that it was a conscious decision to accommodate M/s HINDALCO in a joint coal block comprising of Talabira II and Talabira III coal block while at the same time negating the right of NLC which already stood vested in it pursuant to the recommendation of 25th screening committee,” the court said.

The judge, in the order, clarified that he was fully conscious of the observations made by him as the then Minister of Coal was none else but the then Prime Minister.

“It will be also not wrong if I say that while coming to such a conclusion about prima facie involvement of the then Prime Minister in the present matter this Court had to act with a heavy conscience and with full realization, the present order or the observations/conclusions being made here will have over the morale of the country as a whole,” he said.

Fully conscious about seriousness of case involving ex-PM:Court

An Indian special court on Wednesday observed it was “fully conscious” about the seriousness of the Talabira II coal block allocation allegedly involving a former Indian Prime Minister and a top industrialist but only a prima facie opinion was required to be formed at this stage to summon them as accused.

Special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Judge Bharat Parashar said that at this stage the court is only required to form a prima facie opinion as to whether some offence has indeed been committed or not and if yes, then who all are the persons involved in the commission of the said offences.

“I may once again mention that I am fully conscious of the seriousness of the matter as it involves officers not only of Ministry of Coal (MOC) but also that of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) including the Prime Minister/Minister of Coal besides Chairman of a leading industrial house of the country,” the judge said.

It said that when the court is only confronted with the issue as to whether any offence is prima facie found to have been committed or not, a detailed deliberation or analysis of the documents produced or that of the statement of witnesses is not required.

“Thus, in view of my aforesaid discussion, I am of the considered opinion that offence u/s 120-B IPC is prima facie made out as having been committed by the representatives of HINDALCO and the public servants involved in the impugned coal block allocation process,” the court noted.

The observations were made by the court in its order summoning former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Aditya Birla group chairman Kumar Mangalam Birla, former Coal Secretary P C Parakh, two other individuals and HINDALCO, as an accused in a coal block allocation scam case.

P C Parakh’s arbitrary action caused loss to PSU: Court

Former Coal Secretary P C Parakh’s acts of “omission and commission” prima facie raised a grave shadow of doubt about his conduct in the entire process of allocation of Talabira II and III coal blocks which resulted in causing loss to a PSU, a Special court observed today.

The court said his “arbitrary action” to accommodate HINDALCO in Talabira II and III coal blocks allocation resulted in negating proposal of state-owned PSU Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd (NLC) to set up a power plant in Odisha.

“His (Parakh’s) apparent arbitrary action to accommodate M/s HINDALCO in Talabira II and III coal block resulted in negating the proposal of NLC to establish a 2000 MW power plant in Odisha and thereby causing loss to a PSU and windfall profit to a private company,” Special CBI Judge Bharat Parashar said.

“Thus these acts of omission and commission prima-facie raises grave shadows of doubts about his conduct in the entire process,” the judge observed and also added that he remained silent on the issue of excess coal allocation to HINDALCO.

The court also observed if Parakh’s September 12, 2005 note, proposing HINDALCO’s accommodation in the coal block allocation is read, it “prima facie gives an impression that all efforts were being made to accommodate the claim of HINDALCO”.

“However, not only wrong facts were mentioned in the note regarding formation of a joint venture company between NLC and MCL (Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd) for setting up the power plant but the note was also silent as to whether any consent of either NLC or of MCL qua the proposals being now propounded by him was obtained or not,” it noted.

“It is beyond comprehension as to how Secretary Coal can take any action on their behalf even if MOC (Ministry of Coal) was having some administrative control over them,” the court added.

The court said Parakh was not only the Coal Secretary but also the Chairman of 25th Screening Committee and while proposing the new options of accommodating HINDALCO in the coal block, he did not mention anything about already approved guidelines.

“He (Parakh) chose to remain silent as regard the excess coal allocation to HINDALCO even after the new proposal to accommodate HINDALCO in Talabira-II & III Coal Block was approved by the Minister of Coal. This act of silence on his part prima-facie appears to be a conscious decision,” it said.

It observed that Parakh even made a “wrong noting” in the file by stating that both NLC and MCL intends to establish the power plant jointly by forming a joint venture company.

“He (Parakh) mentioned the reasons put forward by HINDALCO in their support without stating anything in the note about the veracity or otherwise of the said claims and which reasons as discussed above were in fact contrary to record.

This again prima-facie appears to be a conscious decision on his part,” it noted.

The judge said that the then Coal Secretary also did not point out in his noting that Talabira III coal block was a reserved coal block for PSU and already stood allotted to MCL.

“He (Parakh) thus compromised the interest of MCL even qua Talabira III by jointly allocating the said coal block also to HINDALCO. In fact Talabira-III coal block was not even on offer to private parties.

“He also did not refer the matter qua HINDALCO to the Screening Committee and chose to over-turn the recommendation of the Screening Committee on his own without any legally sustainable reason or logic,” it said.

“The public servants involved in the process thus manifestly failed to observe those reasonable safeguards against detriment to the public interest, which having regard to all circumstances, it was their duty to have adopted,” it said.