Dated: 21.12.2010 RC.DAI.2009.A.

0045

Statement of Ms. Niira Radia 0/0 Late Shri lqbal t+:Iarain Menon Rio of Akash Ganga Farms, 9, Oak Drive, DLF Chhattarpur F~rms, New· Delhi recorded on

21.12.2010 u/s. 161 Cr.PC. D.0.B.19.11.1959 .

I am as above. On being asked I state that prior-to settle in India I was residing in United Kingdom. My father late Shri Iqbal Narain Manon had a company he, Crown Mart International. I worked with my father and learnt a lot about business. My father-in-law was running a company named MIs Ainlnternational. I learnt a lot about the Aviation Industry from my in-laws. Since, I wanted.that my children should learn Indian culture I customs, I decided to shift from UK to If.ldia and accordingly, in 1994 I shifted in India. I would also like to state that since I was,having experience of Aviation

t ~ .

Industry I worked for Sahara for some time or it may~;be;.said that I helped the Sahara

. through my experience about Aviation Industry.

On being further asked I state that I started,w,orking with Tata's from 2001 and with Unitech from 2005. In November, 2001, I incorporated MIs Vaishnavi Corporate Communications Pvt. Ltd. It got a contract from Tata's for PR work. On being further asked I state that Shri Kishore Chauckar and Sh. 9' ~. Ramakrishna, Employees of Tata Teleservices handled Telecom matters of Tata's during 2003. Mr. Daryl handled telecom matters of Tata after 2005. I would also like to state that Sh. Dayanidhi Maran created a lot of problems to Tata Group. Since, Tata Group was in problem Tata Teleservices requested me to assist in advisinq on the issues. During this time I came in contact with Dr. Sarma who is now Chairman, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India

;,~

(TRAI). I started consulting work for Tata's from 2005;;:On being further asked I state J(

that I came in contact with Mr. Pradeep 8aijal, theth~eni~.Chairman, TRAI through Mr. S

. K Narula who was a Director in MIs Noesis Strategic)Cpnsulting. I set up Noesis in the.

January 2007 and Mr. Pradeep 8aijal joined the said, company in around March, 2007. He was also given 1 0% sweat equity in the company-on the lines similar to Mr. C M Vasudev. Sh. Vasudev later left the company and joined HDFC last year (2009).

. V~

~.~ ;~-'::

, (

l

, Ji'

On being further asked I state that. Mis Tata"T;eleservices Limited (TTSL) was also an applicant for Dual Technology spectrum after it applied for the same on . 22.10.2007. The spectrum was not given to the TTSL stating that they are not first in queue. COAl filed a petition challenging the decision "of DOT to allocate. spectrum on Dual Technology criteria before TDSAT. MIs Tata Teleservices was also arrayed as a respondent in the matter. In this matter Mis TatacTeleservlces supported the Dual Technology policy, but opposed the allocation of in principle approval to Mis Reliance even before the policy was made public. As regards allocation of in principle approval to

'I

Mis Tata Teleservices on 10.01.2008, and then putting it below other companies in the seniority I queue for the spectrum, I state that M/s.Tata Teleserviecs deserved the spectrum before any other company as it had the Uf-S,: license and had paid the fee necessary for the dual technology. Regarding MIs Swan Telecom, which was the only applicant to get the spectrum in Delhi circle, I would lik~ to state that Mis Swan telecom

~, ,~'

as applicant was not even eligible for getting a UAS licence, in view of the cross holding

clause. To the best of my understanding it was controlled entirely by MIs Reliance Communications.

also state that Mis Tata Teleservices had.applied UAS license for COMA . services in .North East, J&K and Assam circles in 2q06, which were not allocated by then MOCIT- Mr. Dayanidh Maran, on the ground that one MIs 8ycell had applied earlier to Tata Teleservices and there was some securi%clearance issue it was having. It was told that UAS License to Tata Teleservices shall not be issued before the 8yCeil matter was cleared, as per the First Come First Served policy DOT was following. Later LOis for these licenses were issued on 10.01.2008 along with LOis for all new applicants till 25.09.2007 in one go.

On being further asked I state that I, through Mis Vaishnavi Corporate Communications, worked for Mis Unitech regarding PR issues in respect of their real estate matters since 2005. I would also like to mention that there was a real estate joint venture between TTSL and Unitech Limited, regarding a land in Gurgaon, for which Mis

W

®

Tata Realty paid an advance of around Rs. 1700 crores to MIs Unitech. Later due to bad real estate market conditions the deal didn't gg !hrough and the land size was cut down. The project is now being taken up by Tata Realty alone. The remaining amount of the advance given to MIs Unitech was repaid by it to MIs Tata Realty. On being asked I state that the PR work for the telecom matters, of Unitech were being handled

. "

by one Mr. Deepak Talwar of MIs Integral PR I MIs DT Associates and Mr. Dilip Cherian of MIs Perfect Relations manage Uninor. I thinks'Ielenor matters are also being handled by Mr. peepak Talwar. I would also like to mention that my team has also handled Uninor issues only to the extent Mr Ramesh Chandra would have informally asked my advice on.

On being further asked I state that I used to advice MIs nSL and MIs Unitech.

During some of such conversations with Unitech I mentioned that MIs Tata Realty was looking for some lands in NCR for development, wheg ~1/s Unitech offered as they had large tranches of land in NCR. Then I introduced them with each other, and aforesaid land deal happened. They used to seek advice Ihelp from me a number of times. In r.espect of MIs Datacom I state that I was not involved with this company. However, I state that Iremain in touch with Mr. Nahata and would have discussed about Datacom,

;:~'

when they indicated that they intend to sell stake of Datacom and were looking for investors and would have discussed his own media articles.

*

RO&AC

Before me,

» \~\~ (VIVEK P IY AIJARSHI) ASP: CSI : ACS : DELHI (AT REplDENCE OF MS. NIIRA RADIA)

1/'

'-_'./

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045 "2. 5"-0 f .... ?-'·f/

Further statement of Ms. Niira Radla, 0/0 Late Shri Iqbal Narain Menon (Chairperson, Vaishnavi Corporate CQmmunications Pvt. Ltd.), Director of NOESIS Strategic Consulting Pvt. Ltd., 5th Floor, Dr. Gopal Das Bh.awan, 28, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Rio 9 Oak Drive, DLF Farms, Chattarpur, Delhi -30. [Contact No.011-66314000 (0) 26806188 (R) 9810723015 (M)l' recorded u/s.161 Cr.PC on 25-01-2011.

.f

I am as above and on being asked, in continuation to my earlier statement recorded in this case on 21.12.2010, I state that the mobile number 9810723015, the land numbers 42393500, 268061f.18 are registered in the name of my company Vaishnavi whereas the resident no. i.e. 26806188 is registered in the name of my elder sister namely Ms. Karuna Menon.

Today one call number 00055031·11-188819-0-26-20081103-'194817 was played' on the laptop and heard with the help of in built speaker. On being heard the call I state that I have this conversation with Sh. Ramesh Chandra who is Chairman of Unitech Ltd. Sh. Sanjay Chandra is his son. My company i.e. Vaishnavi is a consultant to Unitech Ltd. since 2005 and it is one of the responsibilities of my company to guice Unitech on media engagement and media perception. As 1 remember durinq that time some adverse media reports were being publishedl flashed in respect of off loading of equity of Unitech Group companies relating to UAS Licenses issued to them by DoT. We were advised by Unitech about the strategic partnership with Telenor a Norway based telecom company. As far as the reference of Hontse Prime Minister and Finance Minister seeking explanation on Unitech transactions is concerned I state that this came to my knowledge only several media reports. It is wrong to suggest that I or any of my company! colleagues had inside relations in the govt. Oeptt. to extract secret or confidential information. I 'further state that I advice Sh. Ramesh Chandra to write a letter to the Deptt. of Telecommunications informing th'e actual position of the company and its foreign investment and also to put some lines for the sake of media so that better may not be adversely reported and misunderstood. I advised Sh. Ramesh Chandra so because the ietters or

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

correspondence submitted and exchanged between DoT and operators more or . less used to be leaked to media people. In addition to above I advise them also to explain the letter to the media. As far as the money to be earnedl come to Unitech Group through that foreign transaction of equity sharing is concerned I state that and Sh. Chandra had explained me during my earlier meetings! calls about the quantum of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and how the entire money was invested to the company and he nor any member of his family has been personally benefitted and thereafter I advised him to explain the entire transactions to the media and the department. As I know Sh. Rajiv Bawa and Sh. Ashok Sood were the representatives of Unitech who used to visit DoT in connection with official work of the company. Sh. Ramesh Chandra further told that these representatives will meet Sh. Chandolia and show him the letters and then will be submitted to DoT so that letter can go to the Prime Minister. As I remember the clearance of allowing FDI in Unitech Company was pending with. FIPB.

As far as the reference of Sh Oayanidhi Maran and rather is concerned I state that at that point of time Sun and Jaya TV were publishing the issue that the then Minister Sh. A Raja has benefitted Swan in allocation of UAS Licenses. Sun TV belongs to Maran Group whereas Jaya TV has a link with AIADMK.·

The another conversation which I had with Sh. Ganpati Subramanyam Ganu who is a Journalist of ET and ET Now channel is regarding opening of around 14,000 Reliance petrol pumps in the country as reported in the media.

The conversation is of general nature as some reference of some real estate issue of Unitech. I enquired Sh. Ganu as it was a negative story or otherwise.

As far as my conversation which is heard vide call no. 00055888-11- 188819-0~07-20081105-150030 I had this conversation with Sh. Ganpati Subramanyam who informed about the letter of Unitech sent to DoT about foreign investment in the company and rivals preventing big companies from coming to India.

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

(j

As far as the contents of conversation in call no. 00056517-11-188819-0- 18-20081106-212601 are based on several media reports, parliament questions etc. coming from time to time in the public domain. We were simply talking in very generalize way and nothing from strategical angle.

The conversations in call nos. 00057299-11-188819-0-22-20081107- 183605 and another call no. 00057366-11-188819-0-30-20081107-265426 are between me and Sh. R K Chandolia the then PS to Minister Sh. A Raja. These were regarding putting the efforts for bringing the Kalaingar TV on Tata Sky platform and their pending application with Tata Communication for allocation of transponder bandwidth. Further, the reference of "boss" has also come in the conversation which means Sh. A Raja the then Minister of Communications & IT. I had also conversation in this regard with Sh. A Raja hence he was just asking me to put my efforts for getting the above three expedited with Tata Sky and Tata Communications. As far as the sentence "i.e. coming and nobody came for that" are concerned I state that at that point of time I was expecting that a confirmation letter from Tata Communications for transponder bandwidth was to be sent to me very soon and I was to sent the further to Sh. Chandolia. As far as the sentence "he is waiting for you and I have spoken to the Minister already" is concerned as I have already stated that some confirmation letter was to be delivered and as I remember now I had deputed one of my person to do the needful and he was already on the way to the residence of the Minister to deliver the letter. It is wrong

to suggest that this was something else to be delivered. Moreover here I want to add that as I remember the Kalaingar TV during that time was not put on the Tata Sky platform due to paucity of space.

Another call no. 00058450-11- HI8819-0-30-2008111 0-154458 was also heard. I state that Sh. Chandolia made me this call. The matter pertains to biodata of two persons provided by Sh. Chandolia to me. One was for transfer of an employee already working with TCS, from India to UK or USA and another

...... '.

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

was for making efforts for job in TCS. I was explaining him about the economic down scenario in UK in those days and was not possible for getting a person

. transfer from India to London or US as due to the economic resection and the outsourcing debate. The staff already posted there was being scrutinized and thinned. As I remember neither the job was given to the candidate nor the other was transfer.

Another call no. 00067909-11-188819-0-27-20081114-141136 was also' heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. R K Chandolia when he called me up. The discussion was about a press conference held by Sh. Ratan Tata along with Sh. Anil Sardana, MD, Tata Teleservices. The conference was to announce the joint venture with NTT DOCOMO. The reference of one Sh. Arindam Sen Gupta has also come. He is a Executive Editor of Times of India. As I remember some issues relating to media were discussed.' As far as the matter of Sh. Rajiv Mehrotra is concerned I state that as Sh. Chandolia told that due to 'negative publicity in media to Ministry they wanted a press n?te to be published and they were looking for an author. For that I asked Sh. Chandolia to further asked Sh. Rajiv Mehrotra to contact Sh. Baijal and Dr. D P S Seth for this purpose, if they agree. Sh. Pradip Baijal who happened to be TRAI Chairman was one of the Directors in NOESIS. Dr. D P S Seth was Advisor in the said company. As far as the letter as well as the perspective words are concerned in the said conversation I state that the DoT was putting its opinion and stand in media about some misquotes in the policy and telecom sector hence a letter must have been given to Times of India for putting the said perspectives as indicated bySh. Chandolia and the issue was to be published on the newspaper in the following Monday and that was the perspective of the Deptt.,

About the conversation in call no. 00068702-11-188819-0-6-20081115- 131029 I state that I had this conversation with Sh. Vishal Mehta who is CEO of Vaishnavi Group companies. As far as the issue of cheque, letter and names of two persons Sanjay and Ajay in concerned I state that as I remember it was the

4

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

reality issue between Tata Reality and Unitech Ltd. Sanjay and Ajay are Sh. Sanjay Chandra and Sh. Ajay Chandra of Unitech Group.

The call no. 00070819-11-188819-0-19-20081118-203620 was also heard. The conversation which I had is with Sh. Satish Ohri, Editor of a magazine called Business at zero hour which generally covers the issues relating to political developments, parliament and issues of national interest. The first part of the conversation relates to the FDI issue of Vijay Malya and other aviation related matters particularly declining of foreign airlines participation in domestic skies. In the letter part of the conversation we discussed about the issues relating to telecom and particularly of Anil Ambani and Raja. Sh. Satish has informed about the complaints pending with CVC and PIL particularly on the issue of Swan Telecom and the shareholding of Reliance and Swan. Sh. Satish has also talked about some money paid to Sh. Raja in London as well as to Sh. Karunanidhi for favoring the Swan and Reliance Communications. But I do not have any knowledge of any such transactions.

As far as the conversation in call no. 00071175-11-188819-0-25- 20081119-094757 is concerned I state that Sh. Chandolia congratulated me on my birthday. I wanted tell something important to him but he told he is going to Sanchar Bhawan. Now I don't remember as to what I wanted to conveyed to him and also not remember as the same was conveyed later on.

About another call with Manoj is concerned I state that Sh. Manoj Warrier is the CEO of Neucom Consulting which consults for Reliance industries in public relations in media. During this conversation Manoj had informed about some blogs including Sh. Baijal.

Another call no. 00071318-11-188819-0-25-20081119-120026 was also heard. I had this conversation with Ms. Navika Kumar a Senior Political Editor with TIMES NOW. She covers political issues. On being asked as to how I came"

5

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

to know that Sh. Sharad Pawar had called Raja to get the approvals done and everything more than Pawar there is an involvement of Sh. Anil Ambani for getting the license for Swan I state that as per the general perceptions in Mumbai as well as outside DB Realities directly or indirectly controlled by Sh. Sharad Pawar and his family members. Sh. Balwa and Sh. Goenka are the key persons in DB Reality. In that background only I had quoted the name of Sh. Sharad Pawar who might have pursued the matter with Sh. Raja then Telecom Minister for showing to Swan as well as to Anil Ambani Reliance Communications in issuing of UAS License and dual technology. Other than that I have no either documentary of some other evidence with me.

As far as the shareholding pattern of Swan is concerned I state that at that point of time the dossiers of Swan Telecom filed with DoT and subsequently in view of the matter pending with the CVC, were more or less in public domain. We also got the same from media people. After having gone through the details I had quo.ted some tips on the shareholding pattern of Swan. Here on being asked I state ·that neither earlier nor now I or my company have any evidence to prove if there is any stake of Sh. Sharad Pawar and his family members in Swan Telecom Pvt. Ltd. or not.

Whereas in the last phase of above conversation we had discussed about the aviation issues and that to in a very general manner.

. Another conversation no. 00076399-11-188819-0-13-20081125-191808 was also heard. I had this conversation with Sh. R K Chandolia the then PS to Telecom Minister. In the first part of conversation I advised Sh. Chandolia not to speak much before media. We discussed about one Sh. Shalini Singh a Journalist in Times of India who as per our knowledge works for COAL Tata Communications is a shareholder in Tata Teleservices. Since Tata Teleservices was divesting some equity to Docomo and given Tata Communications is held 26% by the Govt., it is incumbent upon the company i.e. Tata Communication to

6

o

o

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

keep the Govt. via Secretary Telecom Minister and Govt. Directors on the board. The call is to arrange for this meeting with then Minister Telecom Mr. A Raja for Mr. Srinath, Managing Director, Tata Communications. Accordingly, the meeting was arranged at the residence of Minister as I remember next day.

As far as the letter and notes are concerned which are referred in the fag of the conversation I. state that I do not remember about any such letter and those notes.

The other two conversations which I had on 25.11.2008 and 26.11.2008 with Sh. Manoj Warrier and one Sh. R Venkat, PS to Sh. Ratan Tata were about the similar issue of Docomo which I along with Sh. Srinath were going to apprise the Minister at about one P.M. on 26.11.2008 at this residence.

During my conversation with Sh. Venkat he informed me about one news being flashed on CNN IBN that the PM is not happy with the performance of Sh. Raja and T R Balu in view of allegations of corruption.

On 26.11.2008 I at about 8.50 A.M. informed Sh. Chandolia about the said news in CNN IBN and there was a discussion that the PMO had to step in and take up the matter with CNNIBN as to how and why such news has been flashed. As the spectrum allocation process was conducted after the approval of PM as Sh. Raja was conveying this to all including media.

Another call no. 00076831-11-188819-0-24-20081126-122018 was also heard and on being asked I state that in this calli am talking to Sh. Rohit Dubey who is CEO of Mis Vaishnavi Corporate Communications Pvt. Ltd. The issue to which this conversation relates to letter in circulation of one MP Sh. Sabharwal and also in discussion with reference to s~me complaint by him to CVC on fudging of accounts by Mis Reliance Communications. In this conversation the matter is also listed on the CVC website as an action item and its status report.'

7

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

Sh. Rohit Dubey advices me that one of our then colleagues Sh. Daljeet was talking to the media in relation to the same for its publication. The next part of the conversation relates to discussion about special audit of. MIs Reliance Communications. Rohit informs me that telecom Journalists in the media have advised him that complaints was lodged by Anil Ambani against one Sh. P K Mittal in front of Sh. Behura the then Secretary Telecom against Sh. Mittal. The· issues relates to under reporting of revenues by MIs R Com and over reporting of subscribers numbers to TRAI in a bid to secure additional spectrum while at the same time under pay the license fee due to the ex chequer which in analyst report like Kotak and UBS had pegged loss to ex chequer of about 400 crores by MIs Reliance Communications. The Journalist referred to as T, K is an abbreviation of T K Thomas of Hindu Business line. On being asked about Mr. Shankar Atwal I state that he is the Group Corporate Affairs President of Reliance Industries. From the conversation it appears that the person who got the letter could be Shankar Atwal as was speculated by the person speaking to Mr. Rohit.

Another call no. 00082348-11-188819-0-28-20081209-150745 was also heard. In this calli am speaking to my colleague Sh. Yateesh Wahaal, Associate Director of the Vaishnavi Group. This call pertains to the allocation of pending spectrum for one year to Tata Teleservices under the dual technology license.

, ~ ;';.y

Tata despite having made the license fee payment in the month of January, 2008 ,.,

were yet to receive spectrum in many circles as well as were awaiting approval of cross over licenses for three circles viz. J&K, North East and Assam, this despite the fact that they had already completed and met the roll out conditions under the UAS License. In this context I had taken a representation the day before to the DoT through Sh R K Chandolia, PS to the then Telecom Minister seeking early and timely processing of Tata Teles applications for spectrum allocation since despite being the first legitimate applicant for dual technology license. the T atas had been discriminated against much towards their disadvantage. During the meeting I recall having been advised of the DoT's decision to allow district wise

8

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

allocation of spectrum as opposed to the earlier process of circle wise allocation. of spectrum. In this conversation I am apprising Sh. Yateesh of the aforesaid issue discussed the day before. As far as reference to Datacom and spectrum to them is concerned, since Tatas had been seeking its status of first in queue. the Sh. R K Chandolia would had apprised me that Datacom had put an application for 3.2 MHz, a lower quantum than the prescribed 4.4 MHz for Delhi circle.

ROAC

before me

i !'

I{,t ~{

,?---. ell 1 \ .

(Rajesh Chahal) Dy. Supdt. of Police CBII ACBI Delhi

o

9

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045 .

DOE: 29.01.2011

Further statement 'Of Ms. Niira Radia, 0/0 late Shri Iqbal Narain Menon (Chairperson, Vaishnavi Corporate Communications Pvt. ltd.), I.?irector of NOESIS Strategic Consulting Pvt. Ltd., 5th Floor, Dr. Gopal Oas Shawan, 28, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi RIo 9 Oak Drive, DLF Farms, Chattarpur, Delhi -30. [Contact No.011-66314000 (0) 26806188 (R) 9810723015 (M)], . recorded u/s.161 Cr.PC

·· ... r..

In continuation to my earlier statements recorded in this case on 21.12.2010, 25.01.2011 and 26;01.2011 today on being heard the call no. 102826-11-188819-0-19-20090513-184839 I state that this conversation is between me and Sh. Yateesh Wahal, Associate Director of Vaishnavi Group. As I remember the conversation was about sending some key media coverage on Tata group, to Chief Executive of various group companies. As far as the conversation on spectrum allocation .. I state that my colleague Sh. Yateesh apprised me of declaration of Subodh Kumar committee report on spectrum allocation viz-a-viz subscribers based criteria which Mr. Yateesh would have received from the media.

Another call no. 104075-11-188819-0-22-20090514-210820 was also heard. This is call is between me and Sh. Manoj Modi, Senior Executive of Reliance Industries (Mukesh Ambani Group). The conversation was regarding the matter pending with TDSAT in respect of the applications filed by Mis Reliance Communications asking for additional 1.8 MHz GSM spectrum in all circles where it got start up GSM spectrum of 4.4 MHz. The background is in the judgment delivered by the TDSAT in petition 286 of 2007. The Hon'ble Court had held the operators contractual right as being 6.2 MHz whilsed the .start up spectrum being 4.4 MHz. R Com had already being allocated 4.4 MHz of GSIVI start up spectrum under the dual technology policy across India in all the circles.

@

Using the judgment it intended to allocating 1.8 MHz of additional spectrum in its

favour. From what I recall this petition of R Com was subsequently dismissed on

/h

\_V .

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

the day of its hearing. As far as the conversation of Dr. J S Sarma is concerned I state that he was earlier Secretary Telecom during the time of Sh. Dayanidhi Maran but later on shifted to Secretary (Fertilizer) and ultimately Member TDSAT. To my understanding I met Dr. Sarma during this period when there was a dispute between Idea and Tata Group on issue of cross holding and 10% equity in one service area. The matter was pending with Ministry also. As I remember Sh. Sarma on the basis of the records and facts of the issue had took stand in the right direction. However this did not suite to the then Minister sn.:

Maran as he wanted that Tata's should be declared to be in violation of. substantial equity clause of the license of Idea which would have adversely affected the license conditions there TTSL was operating the services. In that sense I quoted Sh. Sarma as person sympathetic towards Tata group as we were fighting on the right foot. But on the other side to my knowledge as well as media perceptions I just wanted to share the information with Sh. Modi that due

"

to some wrong doing of the then Telecom Minister Sh. A Raja he wanted Sh.

Sarma as TRAI Chairman. My reference of wrong doing in this conversation is the grant of in-principle approval for usages of dual technology to Reliance Communications on 18.10.2007 and the subsequent announcement of policy which happened a day later. Moreover Dr. Sarma in TDSAT judgment did not go . in depth on this issue indirectly favouring R Com on dual technoloqy. To my memory Sh. Sarma was then appointed as Chairman of TRAI. Sh. Modi also referred Sh, Sarma as person inclined to the group of Anil Ambani.

Another call no. 104204-11-188819-0-17-20090515-101245 was also heard. The said conversation was with me and Sh. Yateesh Wahal which was also in the same context of case on Reliance Communications seeking additional

.

1.8 MHz spectrum under dual technology.

Another call no. 104593-11-188819-0-17-20090515-132405 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. Chandolia, the then PS to, Telecom Minister Sh. A Raja. When this conversation took place the general

(:~'))

1.-0·

- .. /

@

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

election were going on in the country hence we were discussing about the likely trends and projections in the election specially in UP and Tamilnadu as our company had hired experts for this purpose for poll analysis during that period. The second issue discussed was about allocation of spectrum on which Sh. Chandolia informed that the then Secretary Sh. Behura was inclined towards COAL And Sh. Chandolia was asking to explore the dealership of Jaguar. Jaquar cars which was taken over by Tata Group worldwide, was being launched in India very soon.

Another call no.109166-11-188819-0-02-20090521-173819 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh R K Chandolia immediate after general elections were over in 2009 and the discussions on Cabinet formation were going on. Media perceptions were continuing flashing on each and every channel. I was discussing with Sh. Chandolia about the portfolios likely to be given to DMK MP's namely Kanimozhi, Sh. A Raja, Sh Dyananidhi Maran and Sh T R Balu. I had a telephonic conversation with Mr. Kanimozhi daughter of Sh. M Karunanidhi on that day. When she was present in Delhi along with her father. I know her since the Tsunami days when trust had rendered substantial aid and relief to the State Govt. to meet out the requirements of victims. I happen to visit to Tamilnadu with Tata's Moreover, my company had also donated and carried out substantial relief for Tsunami victims in Tamilnadu. During the discussion with Kanimozhi when she was in Delhi we discussed about the likely candidature from DMK for the Cabinet. As I remember Sh A Raja was not interested in Telecom Ministry. Neither I approached Kanimozhi for approaching to get A Raja the

Min,istry of Telecom nor I was that competent for that big task. I was just sharing the information with Sh Chandolia which I perceived and heard through several

.

sources including media. However, keeping in view the background of relations

between Sh. Maran and Tatas I was concerned about the portfolio of Sh Maran for the sake of my clients. The issue of Reliance and Sh Sunil Mittal was also discussed during this conversation. The background of Reliance is well versed when Raja favoured them in guarantying dual technology usage. Raja was also trying his level best for breaking the cartel of COAL Hence Sh Sunil Mittal c;t~

l$j

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

Bharti Airtel was big sideline. In the concluding phase during our discussion Sh Chandolia told that Sh Srivastava will do whatever they want. I was insistinq that if Sh Raja gets telecom ministry again efforts should be made to take the Telecom Ministry together in the interest of telecom growth and level playing field.

Another call no. 0012286-11-188819-0-04-20090526-165627 was also heard. I made a call to Sh Ranjan Bhattacharya Son in Law of Sh A B Vajpayee immediate after general elections. I was apprising him of negative media posturing by Anil Ambai Group against Sunil Mittal to sabotage Sh Sunil Mittals acquisition of South African based telecom company MTN.

Another call no. 00115664-11-188819-0-22-20090530-091732 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. Yateesh Wahal of my company. The conversation is basically in respect of a conference call between Sh K R Raja, Director, Reliance Corporate Centre and Sh. Hari he is Assistant to discuss some budgetary provision which. concerned to Reliance industries.

Another call no. 00116766-11-188819-0-21-20090601-133613 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. Sunil Arora Chairman of Rajasthan Industrial Corporation (RICO). As far as the word Quid Pro Quo in this conversation is concerned I state that I was meeting a retired person from Income Tax Department who was coming from Jaipur in order to give some consultancy on Tax related issues for our Mumbai registered company namely Neucom for which some arrangements for tickets etc. was to be made.

I know Sh N K Singh former Revenue Secretary and Rajya Sabha MP from JDU. I also have acquaintance with Sh. Sharad Yadav since those days when he was Minister of Civil Aviation in the NDA regime. We met on dinner in the residence of Sh. Singh as a part of social gesture and nothing crucial was discussed. 'About the spectrum issue discussed in this conversation I state that it

('.U) J

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

was a general discussion in which I quoted the Tata was also benefitted for dual technology. Here I want to clarify that Tata was benefitted when it was even dual technology license on merits however, it was kept of looser side when spectrum was not allocated as per the date of making payments.

o

Another call no. 00133347-11-188819-0-19-20090611-155759 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. Venkat, PS to Mr. Ratan Tata and then further to Sh. Ratan Tata. I apprise Sh. Tata about the problems being faced in the allocation of startup spectrum of 4.4 MHz in many circles including Delhi. I also shared with him the interpretation of TDSAT judgment came on the" petition of Reliance Communications seeking additional spectrum of 1.8 MHz in service areas it has already been allocated 4.4 MHz.

Another call no. 00135094-11-188819-0-20-20090616-161713 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. Kishor Chaukar, Managing

• ·0

Director Tata Industries. The conversation is regarding the demergerof land of

the erstwhile VSNL now known as Tata Communications. The issue was pending with DoT and other related departments since 2002. The Govt. owns 26% equity in Tata Communications and the issue of demerger of land is linked to the. divestment of the Govt. equity from the company.

Another call no. 00136688-11-188819-0-22-200906-143207 was also heard. The. conversation is between me and Sh. Prabhu Chawla, the then Editor of the India Today group. It was related to the judgment in Mumbai High Court in respect of the gas dispute between Sh. Anil Ambani and Sh. Mukesh Ambani.

Another call no. 00108448-11-188819-0-30-20090521-121957 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. Rajan, Secretary to Sh A Raja Telecom Minister. He conveyed that I should talk to Sh. Raja over his mobile'

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

phone and also gave me the number. Now I do not remember as if I called him or not. Or if so I do not remember the context.

Another call no. 00135212-11-188819-0-20-20090616-195137 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. K Venugopal, Business Editor of Hindu Business line. I was apprising him of the judgment of Bombay High Court from gas issues with Ambani brothers. This call was made on the next day pronouncement of said judgment. \

Another call no. 00146303-11-188819-0-24-20090708-105509 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. Ganpati Subramanyam, Journalist with ET Now which was also on the same issue of gas dispute.'

Another recorded conversation bearing call no. 00135219-11-188819-0- 30-20090616-203304 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. Yateesh Wahal of our company. I was enquiring from Sh Wahal to find out the issues concerning to FIPB clearance and security clearance of Telenor which as per media reports was facing some problem due to its existing network in Bangladesh. The similar issue was also discussed about Swan since Etisalat had a network in Pakistan.

Another call no. 00145296-11-188819-0-28-20090707-114702 was also heard. The conversatIon is between me andSh. Ratan Tata when we were discussing about the issue of funding and equity of Jaguar Land Rover and Tata Motors.

Another call no. 00146303-11-188819-0-24-20090708-105509 was also heard. The conversation is between me and Sh. Madhav Joshi, Company Secretary and President, Regulatory Affairs, Tata Teleservices. The call is to taken understand me of the matter before TO SA T on R com petitions for allocation of additional 1.8 MHz spectrum. The discussion is around what will be

(_?;:~

t"_,/,'

_ ..

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

the govt. stand on the said petition where Madhav and I exchanged information that he received from AUSPII that the issue of further allocation beyond 4.4. would be referred to TRAI. I advised Sh. Madhav that Chandolia had indicated the same and that COAl would also oppose the same. The conversation then goes on to that if this petition would be allowed it will set a wrong precedent as then spectrum is not available in Delhi for even startup. R Com would then be allowed to supersede and jump the queue and take additional spectrum of 1.8 MHz in Delhi too. We chalked out a legal strategy to deal with such an eventuality .. I apprised Madhav that the Minister would vehemently oppose' spectrum being taken back from Swan in Delhi as it has already been allocated.

ROAC

before me

~

I'

/ei\' --------

. / ·/?-"11° '/

(RajeshChahal) Dy. Supdt. of Police .

CBII ACBI Delhi

·., .... " ....

I~ i

'.

(~

RC.DAI.2009.A.0045

Dated: 27.01.2011 Further Statement of Ms. Niira Radia 0/0 Late Shri Iqbal Narain Menon Rio of

Akash Ganga Farms, 9, Oak Drive, DLF Chhattarpur Farms, New Delhi, in RC.DAI.2009.A.0045 under section 161 Cr.PC recorded on 27.01.2011

.1 1' .. \

t I

"

rn

On being heard call NO.00029001-11-188819-31-20080823-163245 I state that the call is mainly relating to the Singur issue which I was handling on behalf ot Tatas. In this call I was talking to one Mr.Prassun Mukherjee who is an NRI businessman and I had met him once at Kolkata. He showed interest to enter into Power and Telecom and wanted me to introduce him to Tatas for this and other players in these fields. I told him that after little bit problem Dhoot was ready to meet regarding this on Wednesday. On being asked I state that I would have spoken to Mahender Nahata and since they (Mr.Mahender Nahata and Mr.Dhoot) were having problems with each other, I told Mr.Prassun Mukherjee that I was trying to get fixed his meeting with Mr.Dhoot (through Mr.Nahata). To the best of my memory this meeting never took place. I also wish to state that in my profession it very common that a number of persons wanted me to intPoduced with Tatas or other big businessman.

On being heard Gall No.00029184-11-188819-1-27-20080826-164606, I state that in this call I had discussion with Shri Rohit Dubey who informed me that two officers Mr.Khushwaha and Mr.D.Jha of DOT, who were helping us, have been transferred because they were trying to process file of Tata Teleservices Ltd. with other operators namely Swan Telecom Pvt. Ltd. This discussion is with regard to allotment of spectrum in four. circles including Maharashtra and Mumbai. In this call Shri Rohhit informed me these developments. With regard to Swan Telecom Pvt. Ltd., I state that there was already a lot of negative press reports against Swan according to which it should have never qualified for spectrum allocation and would have expected the DoT to have taken cognizance of such press reports and white papers which were in circulation 'at that point of time and thus addressed the issue, hence it was a causal

remark and disbelief that such a thing would be happening. .

On being heard call No. 00029379-11-188819-1-27-20080908-134244, I state that I had this call with Shri R.K.Chandolia, the then PS to Shri A.Raja, the then Minister of Information & Technology. During this call Shri Chandolia informed that they are releasing 04 states today on which I told him that "0 don't do that". In this regard I would like to state that since, Shri Chandolia told about the release of spectrum for four states, there was a lot dialogue amongst the operators prior to this on which circles were being released. Shri Chandolia advised that 4 states were being released and I would have reacted that if this was so then we were being discriminated. Because I was unable to speak at the time he called, I said I would call back. My reaction to say "don't do that" would mean they are releasing to others and not Tatas. I would' further like to state that right now I am not able to recall all the things. However, there had been a request from the Ministers office for Tata Sky to host Kalaingar TV on its platform, In my call it appears that I say that I am going to Mumbai and they are sending an

••

"

agr~ement. It coul? be for this. Shri Chandolia further asks the other thing, which I ?on t recall. On being further asked about what does mean by my friend, I state that it IS someone from Tata Sky or Tata Communications. On being further asked about the "My Friend" heard in the said call, it is to state that "My friend" would be Mr Ishaat Hussain Chairman of Tata Sky, who know Mr. Chandolia also.

On being heard call No 00029720-11-188819-1-08-20080918-153528, I state that in this call I had conversation with Shri Mahender Nahata. It was a casual call in which Mr.Nahata is describing an of getting telecom circles in North India which will generate better ARPU, for any potential investor. In this call he has discussed his idea and he has given comparisons. I have told him that I will discuss and revert with them meaning Prassun Mukherjee. The reference made to Bansal is Mr V K Bansal, who was I think Vice Chairman - Morgan Stanley and an advisor to Mr Dhoot. I also apprise Mr Nahata that we have forwarded Prassun's letter, which is his profile to him and Mr Bansal.

I

On being heard call No 00029724-11-188819-1-17-20080918-155053, I state that in this call I had conversation with Shri Rohit Chandra who was CEO ofUnitech or Unitech Wireless. We had received request from Minister's office for Osiyan which is a value added services company in Telecom Sector. . They wanted us to recommend their company for introduction to Unitech and Tata Teleservices Ltd. In this regard I had called Rohit Chandra to check whether they had called for tenders for USSB and PRBT and if possible they may consider this company or they may connect me of my colleague Rohit Dubey with the person concerned of his company for the purpose. On being further asked whether I knew Mr.Mahesh Jain and whether M/s.Osiyan Communication was a company related to Mr. Mahesh Jain, I state that I do not know him personally but I had seen him in Minister's (A.Raja) office. I further state that it was not in my Khowledge whether Osiyan is owned by Shrl Mahesh Jain but it was in my knowledge that Shri Mahesh Jain is associated with this company. On the issue of Telecom Itelia, I state that Unitech entry into the Telecom Sector was perceived very negatively by the market. There were constant news reports on all adverse happening on their stock, price in the stock market as well as negative market report circulation by the analyst. During those day, there were continues, report that said that Unitech trying to tie up with strategic partner, Telecom Itelia is one of them. When there was a news item of tie up then market would respond positively. Any negative report coming in like Telecom Itelia would result then in very negative publicity for Unitech, which would consequently have resulted in erosion of their market capitalization. In this regard my concern was related to media point of view. On being further asked about the help sought by Shri Rohit Chandra viz certain pending issues with P.K.Mittal of DOT / R.K.Chandolia', l-told him that I will have word with them in this regard. ,. further state that I offered to help them as I have long relationship with Unitech.

On being heard call No.00083452-11-1-88819-0-11-20081210-212546, I state that in this call I had conversation with Shri K. Raja" Director of Reliance Corporate Center Ltd.. In this call of Shri K.R. Raja informed about the ineligibility of Swan Telecom Pvt. Ltd. for spectrum. He also expressed that the people like

v\

e

Dr.Subramaniam Swamy should be appraised of such issues and which should be ~aken by him at an appropriate forum including filing of PIL, as an issues of national Importance. I further state that I told Mr.K.R.Raja that I do know know Dr.8ubramanium Swamy personally.

On being heard call No.00083944-11-188819-0-12-20081211-212549, I state that in this call I had conversation with Shri A. Raja, the then MOC&IT. In this call I appraised Mr.A.Raja about the news article right now I do not able to recollect the title of the article it appeared in the Pioneer against him or his family members. The article from what I can recollect was about Green House Promoters and something to do with Dyna~ix Balwa Group. Since, the article was quite negative about him, I told him of the same and about Chandan Mitra and his leanings with the BJP. When he got upset on the phone, I suggested him to speak to Chandan Mitra directly, because he owns the paper or someone in the BJP.

On being heard call No.00083978-11-188819-0-17-20081211-151243, I state that in this call I had conversation with Shri RK.Chandolia. In this call I heard that Minister was shouting at Chandan Mitra in the background. After this I complained to Chandolia about having gone to the Minister's house with the team of the Tatas and their lawyers and commercial people where one of his Ministers assistance was showing of his proximity in relation to the Minister which I felt inappropriate .

On being heard call No.00086675-11-188819-0-07-20081211-221535, I state

that in this call I had conversation with Shri RK.Chandolia. In this call I appraised the feed back after Chandan Mitra's call. The conversation was to tell him what the media gossip was after the Minister's call to Chandan Mitra. The feed back was that the most of the people said he was the laughing stroke with him .. I also told him about stray again gossip from Chennai which we got from our colleague of Media about his wife's acquaintances that they are very comfortable.

On being heard call No.00071640-11-188819-0-06-20081119-164744, I state that in this call I had conversation with Shri RK.Chandolia. I was appraising Mr. Chandolia that I was seeking time from the Minister and that I had left messages at his residence through my office. I further informed that Minister offered to call and get my

. appointment confirmed and suggested I meet him at 5.30 or 6.00 at minister's residence.

On being heard c~1I NO.00076856-11-188819-0-20-20081126-124723, I state that in this call I had conversation with Mr. M.K.Sharna who works with me and was coordinating meeting of Tata Communication with the Minister. I told Sharna that I am running late because of traffic and they should proceed with the meeting with Minister and I will catch up with them at the second meeting at Electronic Niketan. I then spoke to Srinath who is MD, Tata Communications overSharna's phone, I appraised Srinath that Minister is likely to raise the TCS transfer of Arcot Veeraswamy nephew who was working in India with TCS and wanted to move to London or US. I told Srinath to tell

the minister that it is not possible as there are limitation and pre requisite criteria has to be fulfilled.

On being heard call 11-188819-0-01-20081024-151641, I state that in this conference call I had conversation with Shri Vishal Mehta, CEO of M/s.Vaishnavi Corporate Communications Pvt. Ltd. and Shri DaljeeLa media guy. This is in relation to whether Unitech needs press conference on its proposed joint venture with Telenor. ~ince, we advised. Unitech on med.ia interactions, this particular period was a very Intense and negative phase for Unitech Ltd., The market had given them all realty stocks thumbs down and their lenders were seeking repayments as was being reported in the media. At the same time their entry into telecom was perceived very negative and the Bare Cartel was driving the stock down. The was to discuss the media strategy to be adopted by them for next few days including the announcement of their joint venture with Telenor.

On being heard call No. 11-188819-0-01-20081025-132012, it is in continuation of the above issue and also that the call relates to the media manipulation and media connivance with market speculators which had started to erode Unitech's market capitalization (share price). The call was with my colleague Shri Rohit Dubey to appraise him about the steps to be taken in this matter which included complaining to the I&B Ministry, Mr.Anand Sharma, SEBI, CBI, ED, EOW of Delhi Police and RBI.

On being heard call No. 11-188819~O-01-20081025-145403, I had this call with Sanjay Chandra of Unitech which is again related to' above issue. He appraised me that he has sent a mail to me on Unitech Ltd. mentioning therein that Unitech want to take an advertisement in the press to quash all rumors like ICICI has done w~le similar situations has occurred.

On being heard call No. 11-188819-0001-20081030-104302, I had this call with Shri Vishal Mehta, CEO of VCCPL for a meeting with Shri Ramesh Chandra. It appeared that he was abruptly called away and hence the meeting was rescheduled. My colleague Vishal thereafter appraised me that there was a CVC enquiry into the licenses that was already in news. He than said Mr.Chandra had told him that he got call from DOT who wanted clarification on the valuation of their divestment to Telenor. Since, there was a perception that there was windfall gain to the promoters.of Unitech. I explained to my colleague that Mr.Chandra should write and gave the exact position of his joint venture with Telenor so that this wrong perception can be dealt with.

I

On being heard call No. 11-188819-0-03-20081025-132416,1 state that I had this call with Sanjay Chandra. This is in relation to the above call. I received news flash that India Bulls has said that Unitech was a default on its margin call and had therefore advised its (India Bulls) clients to maintain a short position on Unitech. During the call Sanjay Chandra request me given their current crises would Mukesh Ambani be interested in buying them out of their telecom venture as because of their down tern, the needed cash and telenor was investing only in the company to build the business by investing into the company and this may not see them through their current financial

\J

crises. I told that I Mukesh is not interested in Telecom and even for Datacom for Dhoot and Nahata he said no. Sanjayasked me if I would still check on which I told that it will be of no use.

·I",',i,'

c I

On being heard call No. 11-188819-0-04-20081027-103319, I state that I had ~his call with Mr. Vishal Mehta, Group CEO, the call discussing the positive news report l.B. the announcement of, the Telenor joint venture and announcement of second quarter results. He was also talking of the fact that reliance capital and some other market operator, buying large quantity of Unitech stocks and dumping it, in order to drive the price down, the other market operator, there was doing so was lndiabulls, one Mr. Gahlot as advised by Vishal to me. He also discussed about an agreetnent which would be in relation to the pending matters between Unitech and Tata reality.

On being heard call No.l1-1888J9-0-04-20081 027~ 152941, I state that I had this call with Rohit, the call, I am inquiring about the status of Osian proposal to Unitech to which, Rohit informs me that he has sent across those documents.

On being .heard call No. 11-188819-0-04-20081031-154444, I state that I had this call with Mr. RK Chandolia, he is asking me to tell me to speak to Sanjay Chandra to speak to the press and correct the perception on valuation of the Telenor, Unitech joint venture transaction. I also tell Mr. Chandoila, I will ask to Mr. Chandra to speak to Mr.

Chandolia directly on this issue. '

On being heard call No. 11-188819-0-04-20081031-162947, I state that I had this call with Mr. Viehal, CEO, in relation to the above asking him to speak to Sanjay Chandra without the confusion of the valuation, and he should speak to Sh. Chandolia and share all the details with him directly. I gave Chandolia's number to pass on.

On being heard call No. 11-188819-0-05-20081027-150547, I state that I had this call with Mr. Ramesh Chandra, trying to resolve the Tata Realtiy outstanding. They would have been some .assets that Unitech would have share detailsof. with Tata Reality and there was 'query from Tata Reality on one of their proposed assets, that Unitech wanted to sale to clear its dues. Mr. Chandra asked me to speak with Vineet Mathur,

On being heard call No. 1l-188819-0-07~20081027-145042, I state that I had this call with Daljeet 'and requesting to make the press statement on the Tata Reality With Unitech for its Real Estate venture in North India, there was a misconception in the Media that Tata Reality has given loan to the Unitech, and there was the query with CNBC in this regard. I requested to Oaljeet, my colleague, to draft respected settlements for both companies so that the issue can be clarified. This was a joint venture that Tata Reality had entered into with Unitech to expand his footprints into North India and were seeking land in the NCR. Unitech and TATA signed an MOU in October 2007 for this Joint venture. There was some land, which was already available

.. I·I~'·

i

r'n

with Unitech, licenced and converted for commercial and residential land use and the many tracks of land which was not yet fully converted into agriculture in nature and hence required the process of conversion to be completed. The responsibility of conversion was with Unitech under the terms of the Agreement. Unitech was not able to continue its commitment of investment of this project as it had hit financial crisis due to the erosion of its market capitalization and reality business being badly hit as also commitment to Telecom Sector. It was mutually decided between Unitech and Tata reality that they would re negotiate the terms of MOU and whatever wasJicence and contiguous land would be handed over to the TATAs in its market rates. Whatever difference would refunded by Unitech to Tata Reality at an interest rate of 12%. It was decided that this would be paid as soon as possible due to the adverse market condition, it took Unitech a significant time to repay the difference. Which has now been settled in the last year.

On being heard call No. 11-188819-0-10-20081029-114733, I state that I had this call with Vishal Mehta, who advised that there are going another press interaction, where Unitech has revised its terms with Telenor who were acquiring further equity and thereby taking the enterprise value on forward business plan to 2.3 billion, if I recall this would be? year period. He also advised me that it was better valuation that Swan. I also told Vishal to let Sanjay chandra know that I am being chased for Osiyan communication.

On being heard call No. 11~188819-0-11-20081027-181427, I state that I had this call with Phillik Kakariya, Executive Director, Tata Reality in relation to the incorrect news report that CNBC wasflashing that TATA realioty had given a loan of RS.1000 crore at interest of 10%. I relate to Phillik Kakariya that statement had been issued by Tata Reality as well as by Unitech giving the . exact status and clarity on this joint venture and that there was no loan to Unitech and shared with him that, the media was playing role right now in manipulation of stocks by putting out wrong information.

RO&AC

~

~ ~efore Me

\, ~1\'\\' (ViV~ P yadarshi) Add!. Supdt. Of Police, CBI,ACB, N.Oelhi.