Mumbai: Long before WhatsApp calls, FaceTime, Zoom and internet voice apps made overseas conversations almost free, making an ISD call from India was an expensive decision. In 2002, speaking to someone in the United States could cost Rs 24 a minute during peak hours and Rs 21.18 a minute off-peak. Calls to Europe, Africa, Asia, the Gulf and Oceania were similarly costly, while even calls within the SAARC region cost Rs 21.18 a minute during peak hours and Rs 18 off-peak.It was in this era of high international calling rates that three men were accused of running an illegal telecom setup from an office in Andheri West, allegedly routing international calls outside the authorised network and causing monthly losses of Rs 2.10 crore to govt. Seventeen years later, a city magistrate’s court has acquitted all three, including an 84-year-old man, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the central allegation through technical evidence.Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate DS Khedekar acquitted Dushyant Bhojak (70), Shrinath Jena (50), and Govind Shrivastav (84) of charges under Section 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code, Section 6(1)(3) (unlicensed apparatus) of the Indian Telecom Act and Section 25(c) (intentional tampering) of the Indian Telegraph Act.The court found no clear evidence connecting the three accused to the operation of any illegal telephone exchange. “There is no link to establish the operation of telephone exchange performed by the present accused and merely finding of computers and electronic equipments in operational on the spot does not justify complicity of the accused for illegal operation of equipments for illegal international calls,” the judgment stated.A key missing link was the absence of customers who allegedly used the cheaper international calling service. The magistrate said that without proof of customers or actual usage, the allegation that VSNL suffered losses could not be accepted. “In the absence of proof of customers who had received the services of said international calls at the centre by converting in international calls by less rate of charges. In absence of proof of use of calls by customers, the allegations of use of electronic instruments by causing loss to the VSNL cannot be accepted,” the court recorded.The prosecution case dated back to March 6, 2002, when officials allegedly found electronic equipment at premises in Maurya House, Link Road, Andheri West. The prosecution claimed that the accused had taken two DOD (Direct Outward Dialing) circuits, installed equipment and operated Connecting Networking Pvt Ltd without govt permission or licence. According to the prosecution, the setup bypassed Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd (VSNL) and allowed customers to make international calls at cheaper rates, allegedly causing a revenue loss of Rs 7 lakh per day.But the court found that the case rested more on allegation than technical proof.The magistrate noted that the prosecution could not establish that the seized equipment was actually being used to route international calls. “The witness is unable to state call numbers and report thereof to justify that the calls were sent to foreign countries and thereby financial loss was caused to VSNL and the Government,” the court recorded.The court also found that the informant from MTNL lacked personal knowledge of the alleged technical process by which the calls were said to have been routed. “The informant did not disclose the actual procedure of illegal calls operated on the computer, nor did they have personal knowledge about the running process of calls to foreign countries by passing and deceiving the services of MTNL,” the judgment said.The prosecution examined seven witnesses, including the MTNL informant, panch witnesses, vigilance officials and a police officer. However, the court found gaps in the evidence on several crucial points: who possessed the premises, whether the equipment was operational for illegal international calls, whether customers had actually used the alleged service, and whether the accused were linked to the alleged operation.On the seizure of computers, dish, antenna and other electronic equipment, the court said recovery alone was not enough.The court also questioned why no independent local witnesses were examined, despite the alleged raid taking place in a building with neighbouring premises. The judgment noted that “there were a number of rooms adjacent to the spot, however, the police did not record the statement of any adjacent resident.”The prosecution also tried to link the accused to the Andheri premises through a developer, who mentioned an agreement involving one of the accused. The court found this insufficient, particularly because there was no registered sale deed. “Except the statement there is no evidence of independent witness to justify that the possession of the property Morya House was with the accused persons,” the court held.
