Politics
Archived — This article has been archived. The information may be outdated.
Court restores trial order on Maran telecom witness
The Hindu··21 Aug
On 21 August 2026, the Supreme Court set aside a Madras High Court order directing a Chennai court to summon the Telecom Secretary as a court witness in the case against Dayanidhi Maran. Justices K V Viswanathan and Arun Palli were hearing a CBI appeal. They restored the trial court's 10 October 2025 refusal to summon the secretary that way.
Prism
What It Means For You
- If you follow this trial, Friday's order is about how a witness is classified, not about guilt or innocence on the exchange charges.
- Anyone named as an accused can note the difference: a court witness is called by the judge, a defence witness is called by the accused.
- If you track CBI cases, the agency is the petitioner that asked the Supreme Court to restore the trial court's refusal.
What's Happening
- The High Court order under challenge was dated 25 March 2026.
- On 10 August the Supreme Court had already asked why the secretary could not be examined as a defence witness.
- The trial on the alleged illegal exchanges in Chennai continues under the restored October 2025 trial-court order.
Why Court Witness And Defence Witness Are Not The Same
- A court witness is summoned under the court's own power so the judge can ask questions. Cross-examination rules then differ from a party-called witness.
- Maran was Union Minister for Communications and Information Technology between 2004 and 2007, the period the case examines.
- The High Court had allowed several other court-witness pleas by Maran and co-accused S Kannan. Only the Telecom Secretary direction was before the Supreme Court on Friday.
all-newstop-storiestrending-now
