A Delhi court on Thursday took cognisance of the criminal defamation case filed by Lt Gen (retd) Tejinder Singh against Army Chief General V K Singh and four others.
Metropolitan Magistrate Sudesh Kumar took cognisance of former Lt Gen Singh's complaint after hearing his arguments and those of his counsel and slated the matter for recording of his pre-summoning evidence on April 10.
"I have heard the arguments. I take cognisance. Put up for pre-summoning evidence on April 10," the magistrate said.
Besides Army Chief Gen V K Singh, the former lieutenant general, in his complaint, has also named Vice-Chief of Army Staff S K Singh, Lt Gen B S Thakur (DG MI), Major General S L Narshiman (Additional Director General of Public Information) and Lt Col Hitten Sawhney accusing them of misusing their official positions, power and authority to level false charges against him.
During the hearing, Tejinder Singh said between March 1 and March 4, a large number of media reports had emerged with allegations of carrying out illegal off-the-air monitoring of call records of some senior officials.
He said on March 5 the media cell of the Army Head Quarters issued a press release, levelling serious allegations against him by name.
Detailing the allegations, Tejinder Singh said he was accused of managing all the media reports and the press release also said that he was questioned for the purchase of off-the-air monitoring system.
He also said no investigation or FIR has been registered against him in the Mumbai-Adarsh society case in which he has been allotted a flat.
Refuting all the allegations levelled against him, former Lt Gen Singh said that it was alleged that he has offered bribe for purchase of some allegedly sub-standard vehicles.
Tejinder Singh's counsel Anil Aggarwal and S M Pandey told the court that all the allegations levelled against their client are baseless and intended to defame him.
The Army chief had claimed in media interviews that a lobbyist, who had "just" retired, offered him a bribe of Rs 14 crore for clearing a file relating to purchase of a tranche of 600 "sub-standard" vehicles of a particular make and he had immediately informed Defence Minister A K Antony about it.
In a suo motu statement in the Rajya Sabha, Antony had said that the Army chief had told him about Tejinder Singh allegedly offering him the bribe, which he heard with "shock" and asked him to take action against the person.
But the Army chief did not want to pursue the matter for unknown reasons, the minister had said.
Tejinder Singh said it was alleged against him that he had managed all media reports and was also questioned for his alleged role in the purchase of off-the-air monitoring system.
He said it was also alleged that he had purchased a flat in Mumbai's Adarsh Society and had also offered bribe to the
Army chief for swinging a sub-standard defence deal in favour of a private firm.
"All allegations levelled against me are baseless. I have never been questioned for purchase of off-the-air monitoring system. I am a member in Adarsh Society but there are other 102 allottees and no investigation or FIR has been registered against me. I am only a simple investor," he said, adding the allegation that he had offered bribe was also "vague."
Advocates Anil Aggarwal and S M Pandey, appearing for Tejinder Singh, said even in the case of the alleged bugging of Raksha Mantri's office, nothing has been found but various defamatory things have been said about their client.
Regarding the alleged offering of bribe, the counsel argued that earlier it was said that the Army chief was offered Rs 50 crore bribe but later Gen V K Singh changed it to Rs 14 crore.
Tejinder Singh's counsel said the press release issued by the Army officials were illegal as they were not authorised to do so and the officials could not address the media directly.
"The tone and tenor of the said press release was not official and it was entirely defamatory. The government is not supposed to defame a person in this way and that too without even questioning him in this regard," they said, adding Gen V K Singh and other accused were acting in a "malafide manner."
On this, the public prosecutor, who was present in the court room, opposed the arguments advanced by Tejinder Singh's counsel saying if they would accuse the government, then the proceedings should be conducted "in-camera" as it was a sensitive matter and all the scribes were present there.
Tejinder Singh's counsel, however, said the prosecutor has no locus to intervene in the proceedings as it was a complaint case.
The counsel said that they had received the same replies to the legal notices sent to Gen V K Singh and other accused.
The magistrate, after hearing the arguments advanced by Tejinder Singh and his counsel, took cognisance of the complaint.
