Delhi High Court stays the trial against P Chidambaram in the Aircel-Maxis money laundering case.

Bureau Prayagraj. JP Singh

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (November 20, 2024) stayed the trial court proceedings against senior Congress leader P. Chidambaram in the Aircel-Maxis case registered by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri said, “Proceedings against the petitioner will be adjourned till the next hearing. It will be listed on January 22.” He said he would pass detailed orders later.

The high court also issued notice to the ED and sought its response on Mr Chidambaram's plea, in which he has challenged the trial court's order taking cognizance of the chargesheet filed by the agency against him and his son Karti Chidambaram in a money laundering case.

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri said, “Notice has been issued. The proceedings against the petitioner will be adjourned till the next hearing. The case will be heard on January 22.” He said he would pass detailed orders later. Senior advocate N. Chidambaram is representing Chidambaram. Hariharan and lawyers Arshdeep Singh Khurana and Akshat Gupta argued that the special judge took cognizance of the charge sheet for the alleged offense of money laundering in the absence of any sanction for prosecution against the former Union minister, who was a public servant at the time of the alleged offence. .

The ED counsel raised preliminary objection to the admissibility of the petition and said sanction for prosecution in the case was not required as the charges pertained to Mr Chidambaram's actions which had nothing to do with his official duties. As an interim relief, Mr Chidambaram has also sought a stay on the proceedings before the trial court. The trial court took cognizance of the chargesheets filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and ED against Mr Chidambaram and Mr Karti in the Aircel-Maxis case on November 27, 2021, and summoned them on a later date.

Chidambaram's lawyer said that it is mandatory to obtain sanction for prosecution under Section 197(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the ED has not obtained sanction till date to prosecute the Congress leader. The lawyer said That at present the proceedings are fixed before the trial court for consideration of the charges.” The protection under section 197(1) CrPC is extended to the petitioner in the subject case and the Special Judge has observed that the ED has invoked Section 197(1) It committed an error in taking cognizance of the offense under Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) against the petitioner without obtaining prior sanction under the CrPC.

“Therefore, the order taking cognizance of the offenses mentioned in the prosecution complaint dated June 13, 2018 and October 25, 2018, deserves to be quashed on this ground alone and the same should be set aside for the petitioner,” the plea said.

According to section 197(1) of CrPC, when any person who is or was a Judge or Magistrate or public servant, who cannot be removed from his office without the sanction of the Government, is accused of an offense punishable by his by a person while acting or intending to act in the discharge of his official duty, no court shall take cognizance of such offense without the previous sanction.

Taking cognizance of the charge sheet, the special judge had said there was enough evidence to summon Mr Chidambaram and other accused in the corruption and money laundering cases registered by the CBI and ED.

The cases relate to alleged irregularities in granting Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) approval to the Aircel-Maxis deal. The approval was given in 2006, when Mr Chidambaram was the Union Finance Minister. The CBI and ED have alleged that Mr Chidambaram exceeded his capacity as Finance Minister and approved the deal, which benefited certain individuals and Received bribe.

The prosecution says that at the time of the Rs 3,500 crore Aircel-Maxis deal, Chidambaram and his son Karti had taken some bribes to ensure FIPB clearance for the deal. In July 2018, both the CBI and ED filed their charges in the case. -Filed letters and complaints.

It is noteworthy that recently the Supreme Court has accepted that ED will also have to take approval under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to prosecute public servants under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).