26 Nov 2002
JAYA
JAITLEY DOES "TEHELKA" ON TEHELKA
From Jal
Khambata
NEW DELHI: Samta Party leader Jaya
Jaitley has done a "Tehelka" on the tehelka.com company to
expose how its lawyer had planted his own associate as the
Vekataswami Commission's counsel to collude and subvert the inquiry
and compromise its integrity.
Tehelka had caught her on
hidden video camera in her office at the residence of Defence
Minister George Fernandes to allege role in fixing defence deals and
now she has used the same method to pose as a party from Dubai to
trap two lawyers, both Siddharths, acting in tandem to make mockery
of the Inquiry Commission.
She unearthed the fraud perpetrated
by lawyers from the same law firm "Luthra & Associates"
appearing for Tehelka as well as advising and acting on behalf of the
Commission.
Jaya Jaitley said she had become suspicious of
conduct of a Commission's lawyer trying to go out of way to help
Tehelka and she had all evidence to expose the fraud one-and-a-half
month ago in September but she did not speak out lest she is accused
of trying to sabotage the inquiry.
She, however, chose to go
public on Tuesday since she said in any case the Congress and Tehelka
had already derailed the inquiry by casting aspersions on Justice
Venkataswami, a retired Supreme Court judge, to force him to
resign.
To cut short the story, she used E-mails to expose
that Advocate Siddharth Aggarwal, who was brought in as one of the
Commission's lawyers by Senior Advocate Gopal Subramaniam, actually
worked with Siddharth Luthra in the same firm and both acted in
tandem to save and protect Tehelka at every step of the inquiry.
A
stunned Gopal declined to react immediately, wanting to study the
material released by Jaya Jaitley and also wanting to consult Justice
Venkataswami, but promised to make comments at 8 PM.
His
lawyer friends were, however, quick at the job phoning newspapers to
point out that there was nothing unethical for lawyers of a same firm
representing opposite parties as they were not employees of any firm.
They, however, could not comment when told that Jaya Jaitley wanted
to know whether the Commission and litigants were told the fact that
the lawyer assisting the Commission was an active associate of the
firm and lawyer representing the accused Tehelka.com.
Releasing
the telltale E-mails at a Press conference she called after suffering
in silence for 20 months since after the Tehelka expose, Jaya Jaitley
said she wants to raise the question of propriety in this racket to
the Congress and Tehelka that had been raising the issue of propriety
in Justice Venkataswami being given another job and alleging that it
was to influence the Inquiry Commission.
In fact, they had
cast aspersions on then Supreme Court Chief Justice S P Bharucha who
had recommended Venkataswami's name for another job, she said and
wanted to know if it were not impropriety and unethical to hide the
fact that the same lawyers' firm represented both the accused
(Tehelka) and the prosecution.
Asked what does she want, Jaya
Jaitley said she was only revealing the "truth" and let all
to interpret as they want. She would have brought it before the
Inquiry Commission but for the sudden resignation of its chairman
Justice Venkataswami in view of the Congress questioning his
integrity.
She became suspicious of Commission counsel
Siddharth Aggarwal when he asked helpful questions to Tehelka people
during cross-examination and came to their rescue when she wanted
them to reveal who had supplied the callgirls for their expose and
who had paid money for this.
And, so she got Aggarwal's phone
number and got a call made to his house. He was not there and his
father Vijay Aggarwal, a doctor, responded. The father was told that
the caller represents a Dubai party which wants to set up a cancer
hospital near Gurgaon in Haryana and wants consultations. He advised
that better talk to his lawyer son and gave son's E-mail
address.
Posing as Anurag Sharma
(anuragsharma@consultant.com), head of the India Desk of May &
Co., Solicitors and Consultants, Dubai (UAE), Jaya sent out the
E-mail to Siddharth Aggarwal on August 10, stating that their client
Mr Walter Moraes, Ferrofab LLC, Dubai, has been provided his name and
contact him under instructions of Moraes.
Stating his client's
interest in setting up a cancer hospital near Gurgaon, Anurag wanted
to know "whether Luthra Associates takes up assignments such as
the present one, details of any such projects undertaken, the profile
of Luthra Associates including its partners and associates and their
respective areas of specialisation."
The first mail went
out to siddharth_a@hotmail.com and the reply came from Siddharth
Luthra, the Tehelka lawyer, three days later on August 13 and so the
next E-mail of Anurag went out to sluthra@del6.vsnl.net.in offering
an advance payment of US $1500 for the iitial bit of work and wanting
to know the mode of payment. Luthra was too happy to provide his
firm's profile like who were partners, who were associates and what
kind of litigations it undertook and the corporate work done.
And,
then flowed mails that went on in September, October and November.
Both Luthra wanted to know when Anurag was coming to India. He did
not get the reply and he must have found out that none of the firms
mentioned existed in Dubai as he sent out viruses in three E-mails,
Jaya pointed out.
She said the Congress had suddenly
questioned the propriety in giving second appointment to Justice
Venkataswami only to sabotage the Inquiry Commission which would have
proved her not guilty.
Jaya Jaitley said she had faith in the
judge to be a fair man and she was to move him once again to get a
forensic examination of the tapes to verify if they were originals as
shot or modified and doctored.
Repeatedly asked why she
maintained silence about the lawyers' fraud all this time instead of
bringing it to light when the Inquiry Commission was functioning,
Jaya Jaitley quipped: "My truth does not become wrong only
because I am saying it now." END