Disproportionate assets case against A. Raja: Madras High Court seeks CBI’s response

The Madras High Court on Wednesday, April 1, 2026, sought the response of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to a petition filed by former Union Minister A. Raja insisting on production of certain documents on disproportionate assets registered against him, his wife MA Parameshwari and others in 2015.

Justice AD ​​Jagadish Chandira gave one week time to CBI special public prosecutor K. Srinivasan to file an affidavit against the petition filed by the former Union Minister and objected to the dismissal of his similar plea by the Special Court for MP/MLA cases in Chennai on December 8, 2025.

Initially, the CBI’s Anti-Corruption Branch in New Delhi had registered a case against Mr. Raja and others in October 2009 regarding allocation of 2G spectrum during his tenure as Union Telecommunications Minister on a first-come, first-served basis and at undervalued prices as claimed.

Later, in 2015, the CBI’s ACB in Chennai had registered a separate First Information Report (FIR) against Mr. Raja, his wife and his friends, under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, on charges of amassing wealth disproportionate to their known sources of income.

The FIR, registered on August 8, 2015, had accused the former Minister, his wife, family members and friends of amassing disproportionate assets amounting to ₹ 27.92 crore between October 13, 1999 and September 30, 2010, when he served as Union Minister with different portfolios.

However, after completing the investigation, the CBI filed a chargesheet in the special court only against Mr. Raja and five others in 2022. The charge that he had ₹ 5.53 crore disproportionate to his known sources of income during the control period.

The CBI said the former Union Minister’s assets were only ₹ 2.2 lakh at the beginning of the control period in 1999, but rose to ₹ 5.90 crore in 2010. After taking into account known sources of income of ₹ 95.57 lakh and expenses of ₹ 60.69 lakh during the period, the remainder was deemed disproportionate.

While the case was at the stage of framing charges, Mr. Raja filed an application in the special court in 2025, accusing the CBI of not submitting all documents related to the investigation to the court so that he could effectively defend himself when the court framed the charges against him.

The petitioner, who claimed that he had made a representation to the CBI on August 22, 2015 and urged the agency to close the FIR on various grounds, said that the CBI had not submitted this representation and its decision on this representation before the special court for MP/MLA cases.

Also alleging that the CBI ACB in Chennai had received various materials from the CBI ACB in New Delhi, the petitioner said that the correspondence between the two branches and other correspondence from which the agency had collected the materials should also be produced before the court.

However, the special court rejected his plea stating that the document dated August 22, 2015, not being represented by the CBI may not be material to the framing of the charges and the petitioner can always produce impeachable documents to argue why the charges should not be framed against him.