New Delhi: It was a busy day in courts for former finance and home minister P. Chidambaram Thursday as he found himself facing custody in one form or another, either with the CBI or the ED, until at least 19 September.
As reported by ThePrint Wednesday, there were four cases Chidambaram faced in court Thursday.
In one, the Supreme Court refused to grant him anticipatory bail from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for his alleged involvement in the INX Media case — setting the stage for his arrest by the anti-money-laundering investigation agency.
Chidambaram is being investigated by the CBI and ED in the INX Media case over alleged unauthorised FIPB approvals to the tune of Rs 305 crore in foreign investment during his tenure as finance minister.
The second case was a plea against the non-bailable warrant issued by the CBI and his remand with the agency, but Chidambaram withdrew it Thursday.
The third involved another case, the alleged Aircel Maxis scam, where both Chidambaram and his son Karti managed to secure anticipatory bail from a special Delhi court.
The fourth was also in a CBI court, and came as his custody with the agency, which began 21 August, expired. Here he faced either the prospect of judicial custody in Tihar jail — as opposed to the cosy CBI jail where he was earlier — or bail.
Also read: CBI court sends Chidambaram to Tihar jail in INX media case
Surrender or judicial custody
As it heard the first case, the Supreme Court allowed Chidambaram to move the CBI court for regular bail. However, Chidambaram’s lawyers only made an oral submission for release in the court of special CBI judge Ajay Kumar Kuhar.
Appearing for him, senior advocate Kapil Sibal informed the court that the former finance minister would rather surrender before the ED than be sent to judicial custody.
However, the CBI argued that the normal course of law dictates that the expiry of police custody — in this case, CBI custody — be followed by judicial custody. It said a person of Chidambaram’s stature could tamper with evidence and influence witnesses, including influencing the foreign banks who have been sent letters rogatory. The court was convinced and sent Chidambaram to judicial custody until 19 September.
His plea for surrender to the ED was listed for 12 September, and the agency asked to file a reply on his petition on that day.
But here is the point: Chidambaram would have served a part of his judicial custody stint before the ED case comes up for hearing. In case the court decides that Chidambaram can surrender before the ED, then his custody with the agency will start 12 September itself. If bail is not secured in the meantime, he will once again face the rest of his judicial custody when his stint with the ED expires.
If, in the interim, the CBI files a charge sheet implicating Chidambaram in the INX Media, then a formal trial will begin and he will continue to be in custody unless granted bail.
Unless he secures bail in both the ED and CBI INX Media cases, Chidambaram faces a stint in the custody of one agency or the other.
Chidambaram, a Congress leader, has been caught in a legal tangle since 20 August, when the Delhi High Court rejected his plea for anticipatory bail in the INX Media case, saying that he “prima facie” seemed to be the “kingpin”.
Also read: In Tihar jail, Chidambaram wants medicines and a western toilet
How the case progressed
During earlier hearings, the CBI sought piecemeal custody of Chidambaram rather than the entire allowed term of 14 days at once.
During each of the four subsequent hearings, the court was apprised of crucial witnesses and evidence that the former finance minister was “confronted with”, with the CBI describing him as “evasive” and uncooperative.
The CBI court gave four orders extending the former minister’s police custody.
As for the ED case, the Supreme Court held a week-long hearing on whether the court should grant interim protection to Chidambaram from arrest or not.
The ED argued that money laundering was an offence against society, and the court agreed. The Supreme Court rejected Chidambaram’s plea and ruled Thursday that this was not a fit case for anticipatory bail. Economic offences, it said, have to be dealt with on a separate footing.
Also read: The 6 IAS officers being investigated by CBI in INX Media case