Friday, December 13, 2024
0

Become a member

Get the best offers and updates relating to Liberty Case News.

‘Consumption to go up after inflation eases’ – Times of India

Harsha Vardhan Agarwal, vice chairman and managing director of Emami, has taken over as president of the Federation of Indian Chambers of...
HomeBlogDelhi high court stays proceedings against PC in Maxis case | India...

Delhi high court stays proceedings against PC in Maxis case | India News – Times of India

Delhi high court stays proceedings against PC in Maxis case

NEW DELHI: The Delhi high court on Wednesday stayed proceedings against former Union minister P Chidambaram‘s alleged involvement in the Aircel Maxis money laundering case. The single judge bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri acted on a plea by him challenging the trial court’s decision to take cognisance of the chargesheet filed by the ED against him in the case.
“In the present case, the petitioner being a public servant and the commission of offence by him while being a public servant not being in dispute, the challenge to the legality of order taking cognisance and continuation of proceedings for want of sanction in light of allegations levelled in prosecution complaint(s), would require further consideration. At this stage, bearing in mind the import of the aforesaid decision, it is deemed apposite to direct that till the next date of hearing, proceedings before the trial court qua the present petitioner shall remain stayed,” it said. tnn
High court also issued notice to ED seeking the agency’s reply on Chidambaram’s petition. The next hearing of the case has been scheduled for Nov 22. Chidambaram filed a petition in HC contesting trial court’s decision to acknowledge ED complaint against him and his son, Karti Chidambaram, in the Aircel-Maxis case. Senior advocate N Hariharan, who represented the ex-minister, argued that the cognisance could not be taken without prosecution sanction.
Hariharan said that in the absence of sanction, the continuation of proceedings before trial court is illegal. He submitted Supreme Court has reiterated that in the case of a public servant, the obtainment of prior sanction under Section 197(1) CrPC is mandatory and cognisance taken by trial court is thus contrary to the settled legal position.
Referring to an SC judgment, he further submitted that the issue of sanction being central to the continuation of the trial can be raised at any stage. Advocate Zoheb Hossain represented ED.
The case pertains to alleged irregularities in Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) approvals granted to Aircel-Maxis deal at the time when Chidambaram was Union finance minister. In 2006, Maxis took over Aircel by acquiring a 74% stake. The deal came under the scanner in 2011 after Aircel owner C Sivasankaran lodged a complaint with CBI alleging he was pressured to sell his stake to Maxis.
In July 2018, CBI named P Chidambaram and his son as accused in its supplementary chargesheet. CBI and ED alleged that Chidambaram, as finance minister, granted approval to the deal benefitting certain people and received kickbacks.
The chargesheet named a total of 18 people, including Chidambaram, his son, former finance secretaries Ashok Chawla, former Aircel CEO V Srinivasan, and Maxis owners T Ananda Krishnan and Augustus Ralph Marshall.

Source

#Delhi #high #court #stays #proceedings #Maxis #case #India #News #Times #India