Explore
Settings

Settings

×

Reading Mode

Adjust the reading mode to suit your reading needs.

Font Size

Fix the font size to suit your reading preferences

Language

Select the language of your choice. NewsX reports are available in 11 global languages.
we-woman
Advertisement

Delhi Court Reserves Order on ED’s Chargesheet in Chinese Visa Scam Case

Rouse Avenue Court reserved its order on Monday regarding the Enforcement Directorate’s Prosecution Complaint (Chargesheet) against Congress MP Karti Chidambaram and others in a money laundering case related to the Chinese Visa issue. The Special Judge MK Nagpal, after considering the arguments presented by the agency’s counsel, scheduled the pronouncement of the order for March […]

Delhi Court Reserves Order on ED’s Chargesheet in Chinese Visa Scam Case

Rouse Avenue Court reserved its order on Monday regarding the Enforcement Directorate’s Prosecution Complaint (Chargesheet) against Congress MP Karti Chidambaram and others in a money laundering case related to the Chinese Visa issue. The Special Judge MK Nagpal, after considering the arguments presented by the agency’s counsel, scheduled the pronouncement of the order for March 16, 2024.

Recently, the Enforcement Directorate filed a prosecution complaint naming Karti Chidambaram, S Bhaskararaman, and several others, including various firms, as accused individuals. In response, Karti Chidambaram had sought anticipatory bail in the Delhi High Court, where ASG SV Raju assured the court orally that no coercive action would be taken until the matter was pending.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that there was insufficient evidence against the accused, emphasizing that no money laundering case could be established without allegations of funds being transferred to Karti Chidambaram. Sibal also highlighted the timing of the case registration, pointing out that the alleged transaction occurred in 2011, while the case was registered in 2022.

There were concerns about potential arrest, especially given the swift registration of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) shortly after the FIR by the CBI. Sibal stressed the importance of the 72-hour notice of protection before arrest, as provided in the CBI case.

In response, ASG S V Raju argued that the bail application was premature, as there was insufficient material available for investigation. He questioned the genuineness of the apprehension of arrest, noting that no summons had been issued, and only an ECIR had been registered.

The Rouse Avenue Court had previously dismissed all three applications filed by Karti Chidambaram, S. Bhaskararaman, and Vikas Makharia on June 3, 2022.

Filed under

mail logo

Subscribe to receive the day's headlines from NewsX straight in your inbox