Congress MP Karti Chidambaram
The Rouse Avenue Court on February 26 reserved the order on cognizance point of the Enforcement Directorate’s Prosecution Complaint (Chargesheet) filed against Congress MP Karti Chidambaram and others in a money laundering case connected with the Chinese Visa case.
The Special Judge MK Nagpal, on February 26, after noting down the submissions of counsel representing the agency, listed the matter for March 16, 2024, for the pronouncement of the order.
The Enforcement Directorate has recently filed a prosecution complaint naming Karti Chidambaram, S Bhaskararaman and several others, including several firms names, as accused, said the sources.
In the case, Karti Chidambaram had earlier moved an anticipatory bail also in Delhi High Court, where ASG SV Raju appeared for the Enforcement Directorate and orally assured the court that no coercive action till the matter is pending.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal had argued that there was no material against the accused. No money laundering case is made out as there is no allegations that any money was given to Karti Chidambaram. If there is no money, it cannot be laundered. Still, they registered the ECIR. The accused has joined the investigation and is cooperating in the same.
Senior Advocate Sibal also argued that the alleged transaction was in 2011, and they registered the case in 2022. There is apprehension of arrest as they registered the ECIR within ten days of the FIR’s registration by CBI. I am named in that ECIR; they can arrest me anytime without even calling me or giving me notice. In the CBI case, I have been given protection of 72 hours’ notice before arrest. So that I can approach the court, Sibal argued.
Earlier, he had argued that the value of the alleged transaction is Rs. 50 Lakh, which is less than one crore; in view of this fact, he should be granted bail.
On the other hand, ASG S V Raju submitted that the bail application is premature as we have no material in this case. We will investigate the case. Still, they have apprehension of arrest; why do they have so? If no case is made out against them, then why do they have apprehension? He argued that this application is premature as no summons was issued, and only an ECIR was registered. Therefore, the apprehension of arrest is not genuine.
CBI judge M K Nagpal of the Rouse Avenue Court on June 3, 2022, dismissed all three applications moved by Karti Chidambaram, S Bhaskararaman and Vikas Makharia.
(with inputs from ANI)
Leave a Comment