A special CBI court in Delhi has acquitted Sudhir Kumar Sahay, the brother of former Union minister Subodh Kant Sahay, along with others in a coal block allocation case. The court strongly criticized the prosecution's investigation and evidence, stating that the case was based on conjectures and surmises without any substantial basis.
Court's Observation on Prosecution's Case
Special judge Sunena Sharma, in a 271-page judgment delivered last week, observed that the entire case of the prosecution for the offense of criminal conspiracy was founded on conjectures and surmises. The judge noted that the prosecution failed miserably against all the accused due to a complete lack of direct or indirect evidence to prove conspiracy under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
Background of the Case
This case is one of the 53 cases under the alleged coal scam, arising from a 2012 reference by the Central Vigilance Commission into alleged irregularities in coal block allocations between 2006 and 2009. The CBI had alleged that SKS Ispat & Power Ltd and its office bearers falsely inflated the company's investments, land possession, production capacity, and environmental clearances to secure the allocation of the Vijay Central Coal Block in Chhattisgarh. It also alleged that Sudhir Kumar Sahay, a director of the company, falsely projected himself and attempted to influence the process through recommendation letters, including one routed through his brother, the former minister.
Court's Findings
The court questioned how the private company could have dishonestly obtained any wrongful gain, noting that mining rights were vested with Coal India Limited, not SKS. It held that the allocation letter could not be treated as a grant of largesse and was more in the nature of coal linkage. Rejecting allegations regarding inflated financial strength, the court observed that the figures relied upon by SKS came from audited balance sheets and annual reports, which were never alleged to be forged by the CBI itself.
On the issue of recommendation letters, Neeraj Chaudhari, counsel for Sahay, argued that they were never taken into consideration by the Ministry of Coal or the screening committee. The court agreed, stating there was absolutely no evidence on record to show that the letters influenced the screening committee. It also termed the prosecution's interpretation of land and environmental clearances as too far-fetched and completely unjustifiable.
Supreme Court's 2014 Order
In 2014, the Supreme Court had cancelled 214 coal block allocations made between 1993 and 2010 while ordering trials before a special CBI court. This case was part of those trials.
