1996 Telecom scam: Sukhram gets 5 years jail

Agencies

New Delhi, 19 November 2011: Former telecom minister Sukhram, convicted in 1996 telecom scam was on Saturday sentenced to 5 yrs imprisonment by a city court here.

 

Special CBI Judge RP Pandey also imposed a fine of Rs four lakh on 86-year-old Sukhram, who held the Telecom portfolio in PV Narasimha Rao’s Cabinet.

 

The CBI prosecutor said Sukhram will be taken into custody and sent to jail to serve the punishment as the sentence exceeded a three-year jail term and convicts in these cases are not granted statutory bail.

 

Minutes after the verdict was pronounced, the former telecom minister was kicked and slapped in the corridor of the court premises by an unknown assailant.

 

Sukhram pleaded for leniency on grounds of his old age, while the CBI called him a "habitual offender" and sought maximum punishment for him.

 

86-year-old Sukhram has been held guilty for misusing his official position during his tenure as telecom minister in PV Narasimha Rao’s Cabinet in giving a contract worth Rs 30 crore to private firm Haryana Telecom Limited (HTL) to supply 3.5 Lakh Conductor Kilometers (LCKM) of Polythene Insulated Jelly Filled (PIJF) cables to the telecom department.

 

He was held guilty on Thursday under various provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code. Various offences under which he has been convicted entail a maximum sentence of 7 years jail term.

 

The court is likely to pronounce its ruling on quantum of sentence at 2.30 pm.

 

Appearing for Sukhram, his counsel pleaded to Special Judge RC Pandey, "I (Sukhram) am an 86-year-old person and attending the trial for past 12 to 13 years. I suffer from old age-related ailments and have lost my wife. Therefore, a lenient view may be taken."

 

He also submitted that "age is a good consideration for leniency". He also submitted that "age is a good consideration for leniency".

 

He said that "as such it is not a case where government has lost any money. The CBI allegation was that he (Sukhram) took bribe but no financial loss has been caused to the government exchequer".

 

Responding to this, the CBI prosecutor argued that Sukhram is a "habitual offender" as he has been sentenced in two other cases also and deserves no leniency.