New Delhi: Questioning the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on why it wants further custody of Christian Michel James, an alleged middleman being probed by investigative agencies in connection with the Rs 3,600-crore AgustaWestland chopper deal, the Supreme Court Tuesday granted bail to the British national.
Notably, James has been in custody for more than six years, the bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta pointed out while releasing him on bail.
Expressing concern that the trial may not be completed in even 25 years if it moves at its current pace, the court ruled: “Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, that the petitioner was extradited in 2018 and has been in custody for more than six years now, and taking note of the fact that the investigation is still ongoing, we are inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to conditions that may be imposed by the trial court.”
Speaking to ThePrint, James’ advocate Sriram Parakkat said: “We are very happy that the SC has stuck to the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception. Most of the offences that he was charged with are economic offences, that don’t carry long sentences of 12-14 years, and he has already completed more than half of his sentence in most of these cases.”
James had moved the apex court after the Delhi High Court had turned down his bail plea on 25 September last year. Prior to that, the trial court had also dismissed his application seeking release from custody in February 2024.
Nearly two years ago, in March 2022, James had also been denied bail by the Delhi High Court in the CBI and Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) cases against him.
James had also approached the SC for bail earlier, in March last year, and before that in February 2023. Both times his pleas were either turned down or not entertained by the top court.
Rejecting his bail petition in 2023, an SC bench of then Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices P.S. Narasimha and J.B. Pardiwala had said James’ argument that he be released on bail on the ground that he had served half of the maximum sentence in the offence against him, could not be accepted. Subsequently, he was asked to approach the trial court for regular bail.
A similar SC bench, while refusing to entertain James’ bail plea last year, had asked: “How can you file the Article 32 (one of provisions in the Constitution which gives right to move the SC for enforcement of fundamental rights) petition in this case?”
Also Read: A 6-year probe & a multinational hunt: How Christian Michel James was brought to India
The case against James
In December 2018, James was arrested after he was extradited to India from Dubai, in connection with the alleged scam relating to purchase of 12 VVIP helicopters from AgustaWestland. Subsequently, James was probed by the ED and CBI, who claimed that he was a “middleman” in the chopper deal.
In its chargesheet, the CBI had said there was an estimated loss of 398.21 million euros to the exchequer owing to the deal that was signed in February 2010 for supply of 12 VVIP helicopters.
Apart from this, the ED had filed a chargesheet in June 2016 stating that James had received 30 million euros (about Rs 272 crore) from AgustaWestland, and was among the three middlemen being probed in the case, besides Guido Haschke and Carlo Gerosa.
James had moved court seeking bail under Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure which states that an individual can be released on bail if they have completed half of the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence.
(Edited by Nida Fatima Siddiqui)
Also Read: With Michel’s extradition, BJP gets ammo to target Congress and blunt Rafale attacks