A significant development came in when the Delhi High Court, on Wednesday, stayed the trial court proceedings against the senior Congress leader, P. Chidambaram, involving the money laundering case of Aircel-Maxis.
The court also issued a notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) by asking for its response to the petition by Chidambaram.
Chidambaram Challenges Trial Court’s Order
P. Chidambaram had moved the Delhi High Court on Tuesday, seeking to challenge the decision of a trial court to take cognisance of the chargesheet filed against him and his son Karti Chidambaram by the Enforcement Directorate.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri, after hearing the arguments, issued a notice to ED and stayed the proceedings upto the next date of hearing on January 22, 2024. The court further directed that a detailed order in this regard would follow.
Arguments in the Case
Senior Advocate N Hariharan, appearing for Chidambaram, had contended that the trial court had erred in taking cognisance of the charges since it did not have the sanction necessary for prosecution since Chidambaram was a former Union minister-public servant. Any prosecution against public servants needs this sanction under Section 197(1) CrPC. The ED, according to Hariharan, did not have this sanction before it proceeded with the matter.
On the other hand, ED counsel objected to maintainability of the petition. According to the ED counsel, since the charges against Chidambaram pertained to acts that were extraneous to his duty as a public functionary, no sanction was required for his prosecution.
High Court Asks ED to Clarify
Clarification was sought from the High Court whether ED had sought any sanction for prosecution in Chidambaram’s case. ED plead on record that no sanction is required. But Chidambaram’s counsel maintained that such procedural requirement must be fulfilled.
Background of the Case
The Aircel-Maxis case relates to allegations that Chidambaram had accepted the approval of the controversial Aircel-Maxis deal during 2006 when he was the Union Finance Minister. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the ED have alleged that Chidambaram had made approvals for the deal that exceeded the legal capacity of a minister, allegedly, at the instance of certain individuals in return for money. The charges are related to corruption and money laundering, and these approvals were made while serving as finance minister.
Legal Grounding: Section 197(1) CrPC
As per Section 197(1) CrPC, a public servant, including a judge or magistrate, cannot be prosecuted for any offence allegedly committed while discharging official duties without obtaining prior sanction from the government. Chidambaram’s legal team emphasized that this sanction was crucial for the ED to move forward with the charges.
Previous Developments
The trial court had, way back in the year 2021, taken cognisance of the charges filed by the ED and the CBI against Chidambaram and Karti. The court had summoned them for a later date in connection with the case. However, Chidambaram’s legal team has now argued that the trial court acted prematurely in proceeding with the case without addressing the requirement of sanction.
What’s next?
The Delhi High Court has now stayed the proceedings of the trial court, so Chidambaram has interim relief. On January 22, 2024, the case would be listed for further hearing when the court would decide on the future course of action.
ALSO READ: Maharashtra, Jharkhand Exit Polls: Key Dates And How To Access Predictions
