Twitter
Advertisement

Madras HC adjourns Karti Chidambaram's petition to July 28

Recording the hour-long arguments between Karti's and CBI's counsels, Justice P Velmurugan adjourned the plea to July 28 for further hearing without passing an interim order even on the maintainability.

Latest News
article-main
Madras High Court
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

The Madras High Court on Friday adjourned the petition filed by former union minister P Chidambaram's son, Karti, seeking to quash the fresh summons issued by CBI against him in the INX Media bribery case.

Recording the hour-long arguments between Karti's and CBI's counsels, Justice P Velmurugan adjourned the plea to July 28 for further hearing without passing an interim order even on the maintainability.

The issue connected to the fresh summons issued by the CBI on July 19 to Karti, asking him to appear before it on July 21, to question him in a case related to the Foreign Investment Promotion Board clearance given to INX Media in 2007 for allegedly receiving funds from Mauritius when his father was the Union Finance Minister. The CBI had alleged that a firm indirectly owned by Karti had received money from INX Media owned by Peter and Indrani Mukerjea.

The agency had issued summons to Karti and four others for questioning on June 27 and 29 but they did not turn up.

When the petition was taken up for hearing in the Court, the CBI opposed the petition arguing it was not maintainable. The CBI's counsel opposed the petition contending that the summons had been issued well within the jurisdiction and investigating powers of the CBI. The agency wanted the court to dismiss the plea on grounds of maintainability.

Karti's counsel submitted that issuing summons to an accused and interrogating him would amount to a violation of fundamental right guaranteed under Article 20 (3) of the Constitution. "The Article grants immunity from self-incrimination. Thus the instant summons is only to make the petitioner make self-incriminating statements when it is the case of the petitioner that he has not met any official in the ministry of finance for any purpose much less for FIPB approval for the INX group and thus notice is liable to be set aside," the counsel said.

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement