NEW DELHI, Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy on Saturday told a Delhi court that Union home minister P Chidambaram should be made an accused in the 2G case as he had jointly taken the decision of spectrum prices with former telecom minister A Raja, the key accused in the case. Testifying as a witness in support of his private complaint seeking prosecution of Chidambaram, Swamy said Raja could not be held guilty "alone" of the charges that he fixed the price of spectrum licence in 2008 at the prevailing rates of 2001. "Raja could not be guilty of this (fixing the rate of spectrum charges at nominal price fixed in 2001) charge alone but he committed this offence with the active connivance of P Chidambaram," Swamy told Special CBI Judge O P Saini. He said that as per a 2003 cabinet decision, Raja and Chidambaram, who was the then finance minister, were empowered to determine the spectrum price jointly. Swamy said that the Prime Minister, in his statement made on the floor of Rajya Sabha on February 24, 2011, had said that pricing of spectrum was taken on the basis of a cabinet decision of 2003 which specifically said that the issue would be determined by the Ministry of Finance and Department of Telecommunication. The court had on December 8 allowed Swamy to testify himself in support of his private complaint seeking Chidambaram's prosecution in the case. The special judge had allowed Swamy's plea, saying that in view of his knowledge of "fresh evidence" on the identity of other conspirators, he be allowed to depose again in the case. It had said Swamy "was not prevented in law" from bringing fresh evidence about the roles of "other conspirators" in the scam. The court deferred recording Swamy's further statement till January 7, the next date of hearing.

The court had earlier partially allowed Swamy plea and had said that his plea to summon other witnesses, including some government officials, in the case shall be allowed only after relevance of their testimony is explained by him.

Swamy, who first deposed in January before another court, had sought permission to testify again on the ground that he was not aware of Chidambaram's role.