The Supreme Court has rejected 'godman' Chandraswamy's plea to examine his sole defence witness and former US congressman Mervin Dymally through a videoconference in the Lakhubhai Pathak case.

A bench comprising Justice S Rajendra Babu, Justice D M Dharmadhikari and Justice G P Mathur dismissed the special leave petition filed by Chandraswamy and his aide K N Agrawal alias Mamaji saying, "We are not inclined to entertain this matter."

However, the court said it was "open to the petitioners to move the trial court for examination of any of the witnesses on commission".

According to Chandraswamy, Dymally's deposition would be of vital importance to the trial, as he was present at the alleged meeting with former prime minister P V Narasimha Rao when the godman had assured Pathak that his work would be done.

Chandraswamy, Mamaji and Rao are facing trial for allegedly cheating late pickle tycoon Pathak of $100,000 on the pretext of getting him a paper pulp supply contract in India.

Chandraswamy had submitted a list of defence witnesses to the trial court. The court had issued summons to Dymally in May 2000 through diplomatic channels.

On August 10, 2000, Dymally wrote to the trial court expressing his willingness to come provided the government reimbursed his travel expenses.

The government agreed to his proposal. But later, Dymally wrote that he apprehended being detained in India.

In April 2001, Dymally, citing political engagements, said he could not come.

When the Central Bureau of Investigation said that it was willing to examine him in Canada on commission, Dymally said he could be examined in the US.

The trial court closed the evidence on January 14, 2002, as the defence was unable to secure the presence of the witness.

However, on appeal, the Delhi high court on March 7, 2002, granted three months to examine the defence witness on the instance and expenses of the petitioners.

The accused again appealed against the order and the high court allowed him time till December 15, 2003, to examine the witness.

After Dymally's refusal to come, the accused again approached the high court but got no relief. Chandraswamy had approached the Supreme Court challenging the high court order.