rediff.com
rediff.com
News
      HOME | NEWS | PTI | REPORT
Tuesday
September 3, 2002
0130 IST

NEWSLINKS
US EDITION
SOUTH ASIA
COLUMNISTS
DIARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
ELECTIONS
ARCHIVES
SEARCH REDIFF








 Click for confirmed
 seats to India!



 Is your Company
 registered?



 Spaced Out ?
 Click Here!



 Secrets every
 mother should
 know


 Search the Internet
         Tips

E-Mail this report to a friend
Print this page Best Printed on HP Laserjets


Bofors violated Palme's promise to Rajiv: CBI

The long-awaited arguments on framing of charges in the Rs 640 million Bofors pay-off case began on Monday, with the Central Bureau of Investigation alleging that the middlemen engaged in the deal violated an assurance given to former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi by his Swedish counterpart Olof Palme in January 1986.

"When Olof Palme called on Rajiv Gandhi in New Delhi on January 22, 1986, he assured the Indian prime minister that there shall be no middlemen in the gun deal, and that he would check up with the Bofors company," CBI counsel N Natrajan and U S Prasad told Special Judge Prem Kumar.

Quoting the statements of prosecution witnesses D M L Malhotra, a defence ministry official, and Ronendra Sen, an external affairs ministry official, who recorded the minutes of the Gandhi-Palme meeting, the CBI counsel alleged that the company engaged the middlemen in violation of the agreement at the highest level.

But the court adjourned the arguments till Tuesday, after the CBI lawyers took a long time to answer its queries and it ruled that they had not come prepared.

The government had signed a contract with Swedish arms manufacturer A B Bofors in March 1986 for the supply of four hundred 155mm howitzers.

The CBI alleged that the company paid a huge commission to the Europe-based Hinduja brothers -- Srichand, Gopichand, and Prakashchand -- and other persons for playing middlemen in the Rs 14,730 million deal.

Alok Sengupta, counsel for Bofors, had requested the court to discharge the company, saying a corporate body could not be prosecuted for criminal conspiracy since it does not have a mind of its own and therefore cannot form criminal intention. The corporal punishment provided under the Indian Penal Code also cannot be awarded to a company, he pointed out.

But Natrajan countered this argument saying the definition of "person" under the IPC includes a juristic person like a company or society.

The CBI counsel said a company is run by its executives and their mens rea (criminal intention) should be taken to be that of the company.

He said corporal punishment would have to be awarded to the principal executive [in this case, then Bofors chief Mardin Ardbo], while the fines could be imposed on the body corporate.

EARLIER REPORTS:
CBI did not act independently in Bofors case: Court
Trial court rejects Hindujas' plea for quashing charge sheet

The Bofors Scam: The Complete Coverage

Back to top
(c) Copyright 2002 PTI. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of PTI content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent.

Tell us what you think of this report

ADVERTISEMENT      
NEWS | MONEY | SPORTS | MOVIES | CHAT | CRICKET | SEARCH
ASTROLOGY | CONTESTS | E-CARDS | NEWSLINKS | ROMANCE | WOMEN | TRAVEL
SHOPPING | BOOKS | MUSIC | PERSONAL HOMEPAGES | FREE EMAIL| MESSENGER | FEEDBACK