Even as Delhi’s Patiala House Court sent Karti Chidambaram to judicial custody till March 24 in the alleged INX Media bribery case, the Madras High Court on conclusion of oral arguments in the plea moved by Karti seeking to quash the look out circulars (LOC) issued by the CBI in the same case posted the issue to Tuesday for directions as well as for filing written arguments.
Chennai:
During arguments that transpired before Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Abdul Quddhose, senior counsel Gopal Subramaniam arguing on behalf of Karti said that the CBI in compliance of court condition allowing Karti to go abroad should not have arrested Karti in Chennai airport on his return from London on February 28.
“The agency should have obtained the leave of the high court before arresting Karti,” he said, while noting that the CBI has failed to mention the reasons to issue such a circular, despite failing to follow due procedure.
Countering this, additional solicitor general G Rajagopalan appearing for the CBI submitted that the High Court in its order had not stated anything about Karti’s arrest while permitting him to travel abroad.
Moreover, it is up to the investigating agency to decide whom to arrest and where. Failure on Karti’s part to appear before the investigating officer despite the directions of the Supreme Court led to the issuance of LOC. The agency apprehended that he might abscond to a foreign country to evade investigation, Rajagopalan added.
Recording the submissions, the bench posted the plea to March 13 to enable the parties submit their respective written arguments.
Karti was restrained to leave India by CBI, which had issued LOCs on August 16 and 18 in connection with an FIR registered by the agency, in the alleged irregular approval of Rs 305 crore foreign investments in INX Media in 2007, when Karti’s father was the Union Finance Minister.
The CBI had initially alleged that Karti Chidambaram received Rs 10 lakh as bribe for facilitating Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance to INX Media. It, however, later revised the figure to about Rs 6.50 crore.