NEW DELHI: CBI Director Ranjit Sinha has admitted meeting two senior Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group (ADAG) officials at his residence but claimed he had done them no favours. The CBI director, who is in the eye of a storm after activist-lawyer Prashant Bhushan alleged that Sinha had met persons linked to those accused in the 2G and coal scams, claimed a “deep-rooted” conspiracy was being hatched against him and expressed apprehension that he was under surveillance.The Supreme Court will examine Bhushan’s allegations on Thursday. The lawyer has alleged that according to a diary recording the particulars of visitors at Sinha’s 2, Janpath residence, he met the two ADAG executives frequently.“Yes, I have met the two ADAG officials. So what? I know them for the past 30 years. It is my duty to meet people who have a grievance against my officers. The question is whether I favoured them. Meet ing anyone is not banned,” the CBI chief said.Sources in the government said a “close watch” was being kept on the proceedings in the Supreme Court. Bhushan has asked the apex court to direct Sinha to recuse himself from the 2G case. He has further alleged that Sinha has also met those accused in the coal scam.“It is a very serious matter. If there is an adverse ruling or observation against the CBI director by SC, his position may be untenable. The Modi regime has put a high premium on probity and propriety in public life,” a senior government functionary told ET.Three ADAG officials are among those accused in the 2G case. Sinha also alleged he was being subjected to snooping as the two diaries maintained at his residence never recorded visitors’ details. “I don’t know from where this third diary (mentioned by Bhushan) has emerged. Somebody is keeping a watch on me,” he said.Not Wrong to Meet Accused: SinhaAsked who could be behind this, Sinha said: “I don’t know. If this is corporate warfare and someone has personal enmity against me, I don’t know. What are these people planning to do? This is character assassination, a deep-rooted conspiracy against me.”Defending his decision to meet officials of companies whose actions are being probed by CBI, Sinha asserted it was not wrong to meet those close to the accused or even the accused themselves since the head of CBI could not live in isolation. “Where else will those with complaints go? They come and tell me that there has been injustice, please do something. I look into the matter, speak to the investigating officer or joint director to know the progress of the case.Are they terrorists? Do you want me to isolate myself from everybody and live in my ivory tower?” Sinha said on Wednesday. He pointed out that a team of industrialists had accompanied the prime minister to Japan, indicating that engagement with corporate bosses was not an undesirable trait. Under law, Sinha enjoys a fixed two-year term and cannot be removed from his post. At most, he can be transferred with the consent of a committee headed by the Central Vigilance Commissioner.But Sinha — whose term ends on December 2 this year — cannot be transferred as he is already retired, being over 60 years. His argument — that a CBI director could not lead a cloistered life — did not get much support from one of his predecessors, DR Karthikeyan, who said abundant caution should be exercised by a person at that level. “He should avoid meeting such people at his residence.If at all they have to be met, that too on the basis of some representation and it is absolutely necessary he should meet them in his office and not too often. Being in a sensitive position, a CBI director needs to exercise abundant caution to avoid such speculation or scope of such allegations. I always followed this policy,” Karthikeyan told ET.Bhushan’s plea in the Supreme Court argues that coinciding with the multiple visits of ADAG officials to Sinha’s residence, the CBI director in June this year asked the then 2G special prosecutor UU Lalit to file an affidavit in the apex court that would alter CBI’s stand on applicability of clause 8 of the Unified Access Service Licence (UASL) guidelines. Sinha had contended the clause should apply to companies that had been awarded telecom licences and not to those which had applied — contrary to CBI’s case in its chargesheet and ongoing trial.But Sinha said this incident could not be construed as a favour to ADAG. “Yes, I had written to Mr Lalit. So what? What happened? Whatever I had written was already on record earlier. I did not invent anything,” Sinha told ET. Lalit had blocked Sinha’s move saying this could lead to the collapse of the entire trial, making Sinha retreat.Bhushan, however, argues that Sinha did indeed attempt to do a favour as his view is identical to the defence mounted by the accused such as ADAG’s Reliance Telecom and Swan Telecom. Reliance Telecom had given up its stake in Swan at the time of grant of 2G licence.Bhushan terms these as “extraordinary events” triggered by the CBI director in an attempt to derail the ongoing 2G trial and wants him to be directed to disengage from the case in the interest of justice.Sinha, however, terms the episode a conspiracy hatched by elements he does not name and a blatant “intrusion into my personal life”.