Delhi HC postpones trial hearing against Chidambaram in Aircel-Maxis case

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday postponed the trial hearing against senior Congress leader P Chidambaram in the Aircel-Maxis case filed by the Enforcement Directorate.

The high court also issued a notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and sought a response to Chidambaram’s petition challenging the trial court’s order considering the charges filed by him and his son Karti in the money laundering case.

“The notification has been issued. Till the next date of hearing, the case against the petitioner will remain pending. The list will remain on January 22,” Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri said. He added that he would give a detailed order later.

Senior advocate N Hariharan and advocates Arshdeep Singh Khurana and Akshat Gupta, representing Chidambaram, argued that the special judge took cognizance of the charges of alleged money laundering even though there was no sanction for any prosecution against the former Union minister, who is a public servant. Maid at the time of the alleged crime.

The ED lawyer raised a preliminary objection on the maintainability of the petition and submitted that there was no need for prosecution sanction in this case as the allegations relate to Chidambaram’s actions which have nothing to do with his official duties.

As an interim solution, Chidambaram also sought a stay of the trial in the trial court.

On November 27, 2021, the trial court took cognizance of the charges filed against Chidambaram and Karti by the CBI and ED in the Aircel-Maxis case and summoned them at a later date.

Chidambaram’s lawyer said that it is mandatory to get sanction for prosecution under Section 197(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and ED has not received this sanction till date to prosecute the Congress leader.

The trial before the trial court is currently set for consideration of the charges, the lawyer said.

“The protection under Section 197(1) of the CrPC extends to the petitioner in the impugned case and the special judge erred in considering the offense under Section 3 read with Section 4 of the PMLA against the petitioner without any prior sanction of the ED. Under Section 197(1) CrPC.

The defense stated, “Therefore, considering the crimes specified in the prosecutor’s complaint dated 13 June 2018 and 25 October 2018, the disputed decision should be annulled and annulled for the applicant solely on this basis.” It was said.

According to Section 197(1) CrPC, a judge or magistrate or a public servant who is a public servant or who cannot be removed from office without or with the sanction of the government is charged with any offense alleged to have been committed while acting or appearing to act in the discharge of his official duty. In case of detection of a crime committed by him, no court will take into account such crime except for the previous sanction.

Taking cognizance of the charge sheet, the special judge said there was sufficient evidence to summon Chidambaram and other accused in corruption and money laundering cases filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and ED respectively.

The cases relate to alleged irregularities in granting Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) approval on the Aircel-Maxis deal. The approval was given in 2006, when Chidambaram was the Union finance minister.

CBI and ED alleged that Chidambaram approved the deal beyond his capacity as finance minister, benefited some people and took kickbacks.