State vs Dayanidhi Maran and others — Spectrum allocation case

4 Sep 2026Hearing

The State vs Dayanidhi Maran: Supreme Court petition for Special Leave to Appeal

The Supreme Court of India presided over a petition for Special Leave to Appeal in the case of The State vs Dayanidhi Maran.

Indian Kanoon

Explanation in simple terms

What:: The Supreme Court held a hearing regarding a petition to appeal a previous decision in this case.
Who:: The Supreme Court is the high-level court overseeing this petition. Dayanidhi Maran and others are the people being accused. The State is the government agency pursuing the case.
When:: Reported on 4 Sep 2026.
Where:: Delhi.
Why:: The State filed a petition for Special Leave to Appeal to challenge a previous legal ruling.
What it means:: The Supreme Court will now consider whether to accept this petition for a formal review.

20 Aug 2026Hearing

Supreme Court sets aside Madras HC order allowing Dayanidhi Maran to summon Telecom Secretary as court witness

The Supreme Court of India set aside a Madras High Court order that had permitted Dayanidhi Maran to summon the Telecom Secretary as a court witness in ongoing proceedings.

LiveLaw

Explanation in simple terms

What:: The Supreme Court cancelled a decision that let Dayanidhi Maran call a government official to testify.
Who:: The Supreme Court of India is the highest court, the Madras High Court is a lower court, and Dayanidhi Maran is an accused person. The Telecom Secretary is a government official.
When:: Reported on 20 Aug 2026.
Where:: Delhi, Madras.
What it means:: The Telecom Secretary will not be called as a witness by the court in these proceedings.

2 Feb 2017Judgment

Special CBI court discharges all accused in Aircel-Maxis case

A special CBI court in New Delhi discharged all accused in the Aircel-Maxis case, including Dayanidhi Maran and Kalanithi Maran, noting that the entire case was based on a misreading of official files.

The Times of India

Explanation in simple terms

What:: A special court cleared all individuals of the allegations brought against them in this case.
Who:: The court is a special CBI court, and the people are the accused, Dayanidhi Maran and Kalanithi Maran.
When:: Reported on 2 Feb 2017.
Where:: New Delhi.
Why:: The court decided that the entire case relied on a misreading of official government files.
What it means:: The court discharged the accused, meaning the legal proceedings against these individuals have ended.

15 Oct 2015News

Arun Jaitley Targets Kapil Sibal as Court Throws Out CBI Case of 2002

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley has targeted former Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal at "whose behest" CBI filed a charge sheet in a case of additional spectrum...

NDTV

Explanation in simple terms

What:: A court rejected a case filed by the investigation agency regarding the allocation of spectrum.
Who:: Arun Jaitley is the Finance Minister, Kapil Sibal is the former Telecom Minister, and the CBI is the investigative agency. Dayanidhi Maran and others are the accused in this court case.
When:: Reported on 15 Oct 2015.
Where:: The case is in a court in Delhi.
Why:: The court dismissed the case because it found no merit in the chargesheet, which is a formal document listing the accusations.
What it means:: The court has thrown out the case, effectively ending this specific legal action against the accused.

Similar Cases

On trial

State vs Lalu Prasad Yadav and others — IRCTC scam case

A Delhi court ordered the framing of money laundering charges against Lalu Prasad Yadav, Rabri Devi, Tejashwi Yadav, and six others in the IRCTC scam case on 13 September 2026. On 29 October 2026, the Delhi High Court granted Lalu Prasad Yadav interim protection from coercive action until 3 December 2026. Consequently, the trial court deferred the formal framing of charges on 30 October 2026 and directed the remaining accused to appear in person on 19 November 2026.

DelhiCourt matter

On trial

State vs. Vatsala Aggarwal and Vinod Kumar Ranga — DGHS corruption case

Former DGHS official Vatsala Aggarwal, former Central Procurement Agency head Vinod Kumar Ranga, and former Deputy Controller of Accounts Neeraj Chopra face allegations of corruption involving the irregular procurement of medical equipment and medicines. The Anti-Corruption Branch filed a chargesheet on 30 October 2026 alleging the destruction of tender files and the payment of Rs 839 crores without following mandatory processes. The Rouse Avenue Court denied bail to the accused as reported on 3 November 2026.

DelhiPolice investigation

Closed

CBI vs S. Eswara Reddy and others — CDSCO bribery case

The CBI registered a case against Joint Drug Controller S. Eswara Reddy and representatives of Biocon Biologics Limited for allegedly conspiring to pay a 9,00,000 rupee bribe to waive phase-three clinical trials for an insulin drug. On 31 October 2026, a special court discharged S. Eswara Reddy and three other co-accused in the case, citing a lack of evidence in the prosecution's call recordings to establish that a bribe was demanded.

DelhiPolice investigation

State vs Dayanidhi Maran and others — Spectrum allocation case

Case summary

Latest development

Timeline

The State vs Dayanidhi Maran: Supreme Court petition for Special Leave to Appeal

Supreme Court sets aside Madras HC order allowing Dayanidhi Maran to summon Telecom Secretary as court witness

Special CBI court discharges all accused in Aircel-Maxis case

Arun Jaitley Targets Kapil Sibal as Court Throws Out CBI Case of 2002

Similar Cases

State vs Lalu Prasad Yadav and others — IRCTC scam case

State vs. Vatsala Aggarwal and Vinod Kumar Ranga — DGHS corruption case

CBI vs S. Eswara Reddy and others — CDSCO bribery case

State vs Anbil Mahesh Poyyamozhi

State vs Saurabh Chandrakar, Ravi Uppal and 4 others — Mahadev App corruption case

KN Nehru vs State of Tamil Nadu — Review petition against FIR direction in cash-for-jobs case

Discussion