[AgustaWestland Chopper Scam] Delhi HC Denies Bail to Christian Michel James in Rs 3,600-Crore CBI Case

Today(25th Sept), the Delhi High Court rejected the bail plea of British national Christian Michel James, the alleged middleman in the Rs 3,600-crore AgustaWestland chopper scam. The case, investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), involves the purchase of 12 VVIP helicopters for the Indian government.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

[AgustaWestland Chopper Scam] Delhi HC Denies Bail to Christian Michel James in Rs 3,600-Crore CBI Case

NEW DELHI: In the AgustaWestland VVIP chopper scam case, the Delhi High Court has rejected the bail plea of British national Christian Michel James, the alleged middleman in the high-profile Rs 3,600-crore scandal. The scam revolves around the purchase of 12 VVIP helicopters by the Indian government, intended for use by top officials, including the President and the Prime Minister. The deal, however, has been mired in allegations of corruption and bribery, making it a matter of intense scrutiny both in India and internationally.

Today(25th Sept), the Delhi High Court, led by Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma, dismissed Christian Michel’s regular bail plea in the case being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). Michel, who was extradited to India in 2018 from Dubai, has been accused of playing a key intermediary role in facilitating bribes to secure the VVIP helicopter deal for AgustaWestland, a UK-based subsidiary of the Italian defense company Finmeccanica.

“There has been no significant change in circumstances that would warrant reconsidering the bail,”

-stated the court while dismissing the plea.

The court further pointed out that there were no new grounds that justified Michel’s release on bail. The serious nature of the allegations, along with Michel’s previous behavior, was a major factor in the court’s decision.

Michel had earlier sought bail from the trial court, but his request was rejected. The trial court emphasized that Michel did not voluntarily cooperate with the investigation and had evaded Indian authorities until his extradition was secured.

Christian Michel’s extradition came after the issuance of Non-Bailable Warrants (NBWs) in 2015 and a subsequent Red Corner Notice issued by Interpol. Michel was arrested in Dubai and extradited to India on December 4, 2018, following intense diplomatic and legal efforts by Indian authorities. Since then, he has been in custody while both the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) continue their investigations into his alleged role in the scam.

The trial court had earlier noted that Michel had not voluntarily appeared before Indian courts and thus posed a “flight risk.” The court’s ruling reflected concerns that Michel, given his foreign nationality and history of evading authorities, could attempt to flee the country if granted bail. The court also observed that Michel could not claim parity with other accused individuals who were granted bail, as he had failed to demonstrate cooperation with the investigation.

During the proceedings, the CBI, represented by Senior Advocate DP Singh, argued against Michel’s bail on the grounds that his release could “influence witnesses and tamper with evidence.” The agency expressed concerns that Michel’s high-level connections in international defense and political circles made him a significant risk to the ongoing investigation.

The CBI has maintained that Michel played a crucial role in the scam by facilitating bribes to Indian officials and others involved in the deal. The agency argued that his release would “undermine the investigation and judicial process.” These concerns were echoed by the Supreme Court, which had previously denied Michel’s bail plea in both the CBI and ED cases.

Although Christian Michel’s plea for regular bail in the CBI case has now been rejected, his bail plea in a related case filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) remains pending before the Delhi High Court. The ED case, which is focused on money laundering charges linked to the bribes allegedly paid during the helicopter deal, has added another layer of complexity to Michel’s legal challenges.

The Delhi High Court has scheduled the next hearing for arguments in the ED case on November 18, 2024. The ED has accused Michel of laundering the proceeds of the bribes through a complex web of financial transactions spanning multiple countries. The agency is pursuing charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), adding to the serious nature of the accusations.

The AgustaWestland VVIP chopper scam has been one of the most high-profile corruption cases in India in recent years. The deal, signed in 2010, was intended to strengthen India’s defense capabilities, but allegations of corruption surfaced in 2013. The scandal has seen multiple high-level arrests and investigations in both India and Italy, where Finmeccanica’s former executives have also faced legal action.

The case gained international attention due to the involvement of multiple foreign nationals, including Christian Michel, and the magnitude of the bribes allegedly paid to secure the contract.

“This case pertains not only to national interests but also to international collaboration in the fight against corruption.”

-an official familiar with the case had remarked earlier.

The CBI has continued its investigation into the broader ramifications of the scam, which include allegations of top defense officials and political figures being bribed to influence the outcome of the helicopter purchase. The ED’s investigation has been focused on tracing the flow of funds and ensuring that the proceeds of crime are identified and recovered.

Christian Michel has previously sought relief from the Supreme Court, arguing that his long pre-trial detention amounted to a violation of his rights. However, the Supreme Court, along with the lower courts, has repeatedly denied his bail applications. The apex court stressed the seriousness of the charges against him and expressed concerns that his release could “hinder the investigation process.”

FOLLOW US ON X FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES

author

Joyeeta Roy

LL.M. | B.B.A., LL.B. | LEGAL EDITOR at LAW CHAKRA

Similar Posts