Widening the ambit of the ongoing probe into the 2G spectrum allocation scam to include the period when the NDA was in power in 2001, the Supreme Court on Wednesday also asked the CBI to probe loan disbursements made to the tune of Rs 10,000 crore by public sector banks, particularly SBI, to the companies which were granted 2G telecom licences in 2008.

While reserving its verdict on the issue of having the apex court-monitored probe, a Bench comprising Justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly observed that ?…the State Bank of India, which is the most premier bank of the country functioning under the Act of Parliament, having lent Rs 10,000 crore without Letter of Intents is astonishing. It is a matter of such great public importance. It needs to be covered under the CBI investigation… Investigation should be holistic.?

The direction came after counsel Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the NGO, Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), quoted newspaper reports that stated PSU banks provided loans to about four licencees on the basis of the hypothecation of the 2G licences and SBI granted loan to the tune of Rs 2,500 crore to the real estate major Unitech.

He also said that several companies have also been accused by CAG of obtaining lucrative mobile phone licences and spectrum at below-market prices.

The apex court also said that the ambit of the ongoing probe into the 2G scandal should be widened to include even the period since 2001 when the first-come-first-served was the norm adopted by the NDA government for spectrum allocation. The judges? remarks assume importance as disgraced former telecom minister A Raja has maintained that he was treading on the footsteps of his predecessors and was following the 2001 policy. While seeking details from the CBI about the progress of its probe, the apex court has opined that the scam could not be of just Rs 1.76 lakh crore only and could be much wider than that.

?The issue raised in the case is not only limited to Rs 1.76 lakh crore but has a much wider compass. We would not like to prejudice the probe. But, what happened in 2001 needs to be looked into. It is for the CBI to investigate and find out,? it observed. The apex court also remarked about the policy of transfer of dual technology ?CDMA and GSM, saying while the notification for the dual technology was issued on October 19, 2009, one of the service providers was given the permission a day earlier.

It further said even CAG has not gone into the issue of dual technology and ?the matter has not been investigated.?

On whether there is any substance in the reported statement of Union Home Secretary G K Pillai that what has come into public domain from the Niira Radia tapes was a ?tip of the iceberg,? the court said that ?it has become fashion that a very senior officer gives interviews thinking it to be in public interest.?

While ruling out the CBI counsel KK Venugopal?s suggestion that the court should deliver its orders and directions in the case in a sealed cover, the Bench said: ?Giving orders in sealed covers may not be conducive to administration of justice. It is not warranted as it will give rise to speculation, rather wide speculation… Let us go by our own norms,? the court reiterated. CBI argued that it would wind up its probe into the entire issue by March 2011 and requested the court-monitored probe to be continued ? without involving the Central Vigilance Commission.

Meanwhile, the investigative agency on Wednesday carried out searches at Raja?s residences in Delhi and Chennai besides carrying out raids at the premises of four Telecom officials, including his personal secretary RK Chandolia.

The judges also said that there was a need for a special court in view of the magnitude of the offence as otherwise the objective of the prevention of Corruption Act and Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) could not be achieved. ?Unless the government is prepared to create a special court, purpose will not be served. It is the need of the hour, we must have exclusive courts to deal with such scams… We have to get a special court if we want objective of the statue to be achieved. It cannot be done with existing manpower and infrastructure,? the bench observed.

Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium admitted that the case needs special expertise and said he would consult the government and report back to the court.