Delhi HC Stays Trial Court Proceedings Against P Chidambaram in Aircel-Maxis Case

As the legal battle continues, Chidambaram’s supporters argue that the case has been lingering unnecessarily. The next steps will depend on how the court addresses the questions surrounding the trial’s legitimacy, which could set a significant precedent for future cases involving public figures

Breaking News

In a significant development, the Delhi High Court has stayed the trial court proceedings against former Union Minister P Chidambaram in the Aircel-Maxis money laundering case. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had filed charges against Chidambaram and his son Karti, accusing them of involvement in financial irregularities related to the 2006 Aircel-Maxis deal.

On Wednesday, Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri issued a stay on the trial court proceedings, which had begun after the ED and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed charge sheets. The court also issued a notice to the ED, asking for a response to Chidambaram’s petition, which challenges the trial court’s cognizance of the charges. The court has scheduled the next hearing for January 22.

Chidambaram’s counsel argued that the trial court had taken cognizance without obtaining the necessary sanction for prosecution, as required under Section 197(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), given that he was a public servant at the time of the alleged offense. They contend that the absence of this sanction makes the proceedings unlawful. In response, the ED contested this claim, asserting that no such sanction was needed since the charges were not related to his official duties.

The case revolves around allegations that Chidambaram, while serving as the Union Finance Minister, granted approval for the controversial Aircel-Maxis deal through the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB), in exchange for kickbacks. Chidambaram asserts that he followed all procedures within legal bounds and deems the charges against him baseless.

As the legal battle continues, Chidambaram’s supporters argue that the case has been lingering unnecessarily. The next steps will depend on how the court addresses the questions surrounding the trial’s legitimacy, which could set a significant precedent for future cases involving public figures

Latest News

Popular Videos

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -spot_img