New Delhi, Aug. 23: Spectrum scam accused Kanimozhi today sought to summon the Prime Minister as a witness in the case but legal experts said the plea was “premature” and intended as a “diversionary” ploy.

“If the trial goes on, I would like to summon the Prime Minister as a witness,” said Sushil Kumar, the counsel for the DMK MP who is accused of conspiring with A. Raja to accept a Rs 200-crore bribe from Shahid Balwa’s DB Realty in exchange for 2G licences.

“The PM, the then finance minister and the present telecom minister are the three best witnesses to prove there was no loss. They have said in Parliament that the government has not suffered any loss as 2G was not to be auctioned.”

Kumar contended the CBI case was based on the premise that the accused had caused huge losses to the exchequer by not auctioning the licences. “In a meeting, Manmohan Singh had decided not to auction 2G spectrum in the presence of Chidambaram, then finance minister, and Raja, then telecom minister.”

Legal experts confirmed that the Prime Minister could be summoned as a witness in a particular case but said such a call at this stage of the 2G case was “intended to mislead people who are gullible”.

“Charges have not even been framed in the case,” former Delhi High Court judge and Supreme Court lawyer R.S. Sodhi said.

“Yes, a Prime Minister can be summoned depending upon who is summoning. If it’s an accused who is summoning in defence and he knows fully well that the witness will support him, he can summon,” Justice Sodhi said.

“However, the accused will not be in a position to cross-examine a witness produced in his defence. So it’s stupidity to summon a witness who may not support the accused.”

If summoned, a witness could only seek convenient dates to appear in court but would have to appear personally and depose on the facts of the case, Sodhi said. An accused could appear through his counsel but a witness has to take the stand himself, he added.

No Indian Prime Minister has, however, been examined as a witness in any case.

“Charges have to be first framed, evidence has to be lead, the prosecution has to wrap up its arguments, and then the court will ask the accused the last line ‘Do you wish to lead evidence?’” Sodhi said.

“It is only at that stage that he can insist on summoning witnesses.”

Sodhi said there was, however, a precedent in which a President had appeared in court in person. V.V. Giri chose to appear in person before the Supreme Court when he could have been examined before a court commissioner in Rashtrapati Bhavan in a case challenging his election as President.

Faced with the unprecedented, the Supreme Court placed a special chair for him to sit in the Supreme Court.

Giri an independent candidate backed by Indira Gandhi had won the election by a conscience vote defending the official Congress nominee Neelam Sanjiva Reddy.

His election was challenged but Giri eventually won the case.

No Indian Prime Minister has, however, been examined as a witness in any case. “Such a situation has never arisen,” senior lawyer K.T.S. Tulsi said. He refused to comment on the legality of the demand saying he had represented one of the 2G accused.