Aircel-Maxis Case: Karti Gets Protection From Arrest Till April 16
Protection was granted in the Aircel-Maxis matter arising out of the 2G spectrum cases lodged by the CBI and the ED.
advertisement
A Delhi court on 24 March granted protection to Karti Chidambaram from arrest till April 16 in Aircel-Maxis matter arising out of the 2G spectrum cases lodged by the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED), PTI reported. Special Judge O P Saini gave the agencies three weeks to file a detailed reply on the anticipatory bail plea of Karti.
The court, which pronounced the judgement in a packed courtroom, also said that Karti shall not leave the country without its permission. Karti was granted bail by the high court in the INX media case on 23 March.
Arguing in the CBI case earlier in the day, senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, appearing for Karti, said that there was neither any allegation against Karti in the Aircel Maxis case nor there was anything to show that he knew the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) officials.
In the ED case, senior advocate Gopal Subramaniam, also appearing for Karti, argued that Karti has cooperated in the other matters as well and there was no question that he would flee the county or tamper with evidence.
Wearing black gowns, Karti's father and former finance minister P Chidambaram and his wife Nalini Chidambaram were also present during the hearing.
ED Opposes Karti’s Bail in INX Media Case
A day after Karti, the son of senior Congress leader P Chidambaram, was granted bail by the Delhi High Court in the INX Media corruption case, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) went on to oppose the order in New Delhi’s Patiala House Court on 24 March. ED accused Karti of “forum shopping”, stating that he “has approached multiple courts through multiple applications.”
Karti was granted bail by Delhi High Court on a surety of Rs 10 lakh and on the condition that he will seek prior permission of the CBI if he wants to leave country.
His lawyers told the court that his passport has already been deposited with the authorities, reported PTI. Karti has been instructed that he cannot influence witnesses or close bank accounts, or tamper with any evidence in the case while out on bail.
“The question is whether the finance minister’s approvals were valid. What has that got to do with Karti Chidambaram?, ” he said.
The former finance minister’s son was arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) at Chennai airport on 28 February, when he returned from the United Kingdom. Karti’s 12-day judicial custody was due to expire on 24 February.
Karti was arrested for allegedly taking money to facilitate Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance to INX Media in 2007 when his father was the Finance Minister in the UPA government. An FIR was registered in May 2017 in this regard.
The fresh evidence in the case, which triggered Karti's arrest, was based on a statement of Indrani Mukerjea, former director of INX Media (P) Ltd.
Karti Destroyed Evidence: CBI Opposes Bail Plea
The CBI opposed his bail plea on the grounds that he has "already destroyed evidence" in the case and was an "influential" person.
Karti's counsel argued that no case under the Prevention of Corruption Act was made out against him since the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had neither questioned any public servant, nor made them an accused in the matter, PTI reported.
After being granted bail on 23 March, Karti filed an anticipatory bail plea against CBI and ED in a case relating to alleged FIPB clearance to M/S Global Communication Holding Services Ltd as part of the Aircel-Maxis case.
FIPB Officers Examined by CBI Didn't Say Karti Approached Them: Delhi High Court Notes
None of the senior officers of Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) who were at its helm when INX Media was granted FDI clearance, have said in their statements to CBI that they were approached or influenced by Karti Chidambaram, the Delhi High Court said on 23 March, PTI reported.
Justice S P Garg, in his order, also observed that in the entire CBI investigation so far, no public servant has been identified or apprehended who was allegedly approached or influenced to scuttle any action against the media house for alleged irregularities or illegalities committed by it, the report added.
The high court noted that the senior FIPB officers had merely informed CBI that if the past history of the case been brought to the notice of the Board before its meeting held on 24 October, 2008, its decision with regard to INX Media could have been different.
(With inputs from PTI, ANI and IANS)
(This is a developing story)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)