CHENNAI: Former Union telecom minister Dayananidhi Maran is facing arrest in the illegal telephone exchange case after the Madras high court on Monday cancelled the anticipatory bail granted to him on June 30 and directed him to surrender before CBI by August 13.

Knocking off the six-week interim, albeit conditional, legal insulation against arrest enjoyed by the DMK leader, Justice S Vaidhyanathan said: "I find that Maran has been involved in serious offences, wherein allegations of corruption, cheating and causing wrongful loss to the exchequer to the tune of crores of rupees, have been attributed ... My judicial conscience prevented me from enlarging him on bail. Just as liberty is precious to an individual, so is society's interest in maintenance of peace, law and order."

After the order was delivered, Maran's counsel requested the court to grant him three days to surrender. Later, however, his advocates said he would move the Supreme Court on Tuesday itself for remedy.

The CBI's case is that Maran, during his tenure as Union minister from 2004 to 2007, availed himself of several hundred telephone and broadband lines, and established a mini telephone exchange at his house in Chennai. He used the facilities for transporting data for Sun TV, owned by his brother Kalanithi Maran, it was alleged.

READ ALSO: Madras HC grants anticipatory bail to Dayanidhi Maran

CBI started preliminary enquiry in 2011 and registered an FIR in July 2013. In January and October 2014, Maran attended inquiry sessions with the investigating officer. However, when he was summoned again, and asked to present himself before CBI in Delhi on July 1, 2 and 3, he moved the Madras high court and got anticipatory bail on June 30. CBI sought cancellation of the bail on the ground that Maran did not cooperate with the investigation and deliberately gave contradictory replies.

Taking note of "the huge magnitude of the case", Justice Vaidhyanathan in his order said: "I find considerable force in the contention raised by additional solicitor general of India G Rajagopalan that when a number of undertrials have been languishing in jails even for petty offences, then why Maran should be extended special concession by enlarging him on bail."

The judge also pointed out that while granting anticipatory bail, the high court had said it was subject to the condition that he should cooperate with the inquiry. However, when he was examined, he did not cooperate, retracted from his earlier version, gave evasive answers and the information provided by him did not match with the statement given by him, the judge said, citing the CBI's petition.

Rejecting the claim of political vendetta and CBI's perceived plot to humiliate Maran, Justice Vaidhyanathan said preliminary enquiry was started in 2011 and FIR was lodged in 2013. Till June 13, 2015, the CBI had not made any attempts to arrest Maran though there was no protection of bail and he was very much available in their presence in January and October 2014. "Therefore, if the CBI really had made accusations with the object of humiliating Maran, he would have been arrested by now," he said.

