For one, the ED categorically says that former External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh sought the oil allocation “for himself’’ and nominated Andaleeb Sehgal and his firm to “do the transaction on his behalf.” The Pathak report stopped short, saying that had it not been for Natwar the deal wouldn’t have gone through.

While the Pathak report described former Ambassador Aneil Mathrani’s amnesia in recalling details of the Natwar Singh-led Congress delegation to Baghdad, it was Mathrani who confirmed to the ED the presence of Jagat Singh and Andaleeb Sehgal during all meetings held before signing of the oil contracts. The Pathak report only stated it was “possible’’ Jagat Singh was present at the meetings.

Mathrani, as it turns out, gave a detailed account of what he called Natwar Singh’s role prior to the signing of the contracts for 2 million barrels of oil. His sworn testimony: “It was obvious that Natwar Singh was giving appropriate directions to Andaleeb Sehgal to be available in particular places and Government offices in consultation with Jagat...It was clear that the priority for the three, Natwar Singh, Jagat Singh and Andaleeb Sehgal, was to apparently tie up business deals.’’

The ED’s report juxtaposes Natwar’s denials — about either writing letters of introduction, the presence of Sehgal in Baghdad and so on — with statements on oath given by Mathrani, Andaleeb and R Dayakar, the then Indian Ambassador in Bagdhad.

The ED’s indictment couldn’t be more clear: “Natwar Singh along with his associates jointly and severally, without the general or special permission of the Reserve Bank of India, dealt in foreign exchange totalling $898,027 in respect of two oil contracts.’’

Then Ambassador Dayakar has admitted to the ED that not only did Natwar telephone him in Baghdad asking him to ensure that Andaleeb’s firm Hamdaan Exports was not “discriminated’’ against, he followed this up by actively following up Natwar Singh’s bidding.

According to Dayakar’s statement, the day after the Indian Embassy in Bagdhad hosted a reception for the Congress delegation led by Natwar, Andaleeb again visited the Embassy.

The ED’s report states that on his (Andaleeb’s) request, the Ambassador issued a number of “note verbales” to the Foreign Economic Relations Department, Ministry of Trade, recommending Hamdaan for supply of various commodities and also to issue tender documents to Hamdaan Exports.’’

Five separate note verbales were issued for Hamdaan Exports to supply commodities such as sugar, lentils, construction material, wheat and rice as well as to supply requirements for shopping centres. These are now part of the case evidence.

Dayakar has also admitted that, “in the case of Hamdaan Exports, formal inquiries were dispensed with and unusually large number of Note Verbales were issued one after another in quick succession based on the introduction of Jagat Singh.’’

Despite these statements, Natwar Singh told the ED: “I did not speak to the Ambassador about Andaleeb...I have no knowledge of his business activities...he did not ask me to help him in his business.’’

The nexus between the persons who did the groundwork before the oil contracts were signed is also summed up by Mathrani: “There used to be always a close door consultation between Natwar Singh, Jagat Singh and Andaleeb Sehgal and also they would discuss with Ambassador Dayakar.’’