New Delhi, Aug 8 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear Enforcement Directorate’s plea against an order deferring arguments on framing of money laundering charges against Congress MP Karti P Chidambaram in the Aircel-Maxis case.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi issued notice to Chidambaram after Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, representing the ED, said the trial under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) would be delayed due to the Delhi High Court order.
The bench asked Raju about the prejudice caused to the agency as the high court had asked to wait for charges to be framed in the predicate offence upon which ED’s complaint was based.
“Let’s suppose in the predicate offence, tomorrow no charge is framed, or the trial court frames charges but the high court or this court sets them aside then your entire hard-work and labour will go in waste,” Justice Kant told Raju.
Raju replied, “Look at it the other way. I do not examine witnesses, the trial is delayed, witnesses die and my evidence is lost. The balance that can be struck here is that — go ahead with the trial, do not pronounce judgment until final order in the predicate offence.” The bench observed the Delhi High Court had “interfered prematurely” and it should have alternatively safeguarded Chidambaram by merely saying the PMLA trial should not conclude before the trial in the predicate offence.
“Actually, the high court has interfered little prematurely. The high court could have safeguard him by saying that both trials will continue together parallely with PMLA trial not taking precedence,” Justice Kant noted.
On April 9, the Delhi High Court asked the trial court to defer the arguments on charge to a day after May 29 as it sought enforcement directorate’s response on the plea of Chidambaram seeking to defer framing of charges in two cases against him.
The lawmaker from Sivaganga constituency had argued that unless charges were framed in the scheduled offences, i.e., in the alleged Chinese visa and Aircel Maxis cases of the CBI, arguments on charges ought not commence in the related money laundering cases in the trial court.
The high court said prima facie, the discharge of the petitioner in the predicate offence would certainly have bearing on the trial under the PMLA as there could be no offence of money laundering against him if he was given the relief in the CBI cases.
“Existence of scheduled offence and proceeds of crime being the property derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity relating to the scheduled offence are sine qua non for not only initiating prosecution under PMLA but also for continuation thereof,” it observed.
Chidambaram has challenged March 28 orders of the trial court before the high court, which dismissed his applications seeking the deferment of arguments on the charges against him.
The ED registered a money laundering case against Chidambaram and others in the alleged scam involving the issuance of visas to 263 Chinese nationals in 2011 when his father P Chidambaram was the union home minister. PTI MNL MNL AMK AMK
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.