Former Union Minister P Chidambaram has challenged the Delhi High Court’s acceptance of money laundering charges against him in the INX Media case, claiming mandatory prosecution sanction was not obtained. His counsel argues the trial court lacked jurisdiction, while the Enforcement Directorate asserts the allegations aren’t linked to his public duties. A hearing is set for November 28.
New Delhi: Former Union Minister P Chidambaram has approached the Delhi High Court challenging the trial court’s cognisance of money laundering charges against him in the INX Media case, arguing that the mandatory sanction to prosecute him was not obtained.
Appearing for Chidambaram, senior counsel N Hariharan contended that when the trial court took cognisance in 2021 under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the Enforcement Directorate (ED) failed to acquire the requisite sanction for prosecuting the Congress leader. Hariharan emphasized that since Chidambaram was a public servant during the time of the alleged offences, the ED was obligated to secure prior approval in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and PMLA provisions.
“The trial court erred in taking cognisance on March 24, 2021, without the ED obtaining prior sanction. Without such approval, the trial court has no jurisdiction to proceed,”
argued Hariharan, alongside lawyers Arshdeep Singh Khurana and Akshat Gupta.
The ED, however, countered by stating that the allegations in the money laundering case were unrelated to the discharge of any official duty by Chidambaram as a public servant.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri is scheduled to hear the matter on November 28.
The case stems from a CBI investigation initiated on May 15, 2017, which alleged irregularities in granting Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance to the INX Media group. The clearance allowed the group to receive overseas funds worth Rs 305 crore in 2007, during Chidambaram’s tenure as finance minister.
Chidambaram was arrested by the CBI on August 21, 2019, in connection with the INX Media corruption case, followed by his arrest by the ED on October 16, 2019, in a related money laundering case.
Chidambaram’s plea in the High Court seeks to quash the trial court’s cognisance and all related proceedings, citing the absence of mandatory prosecution sanction. Notably, the High Court recently stayed trial court proceedings in the Aircel-Maxis case, where Chidambaram had similarly challenged the cognisance of chargesheets filed by the ED.
The plea highlights procedural lapses, asserting that prosecutorial sanction is a legal prerequisite for cases involving public servants. Chidambaram’s defense team has called for strict adherence to due process, suggesting that the case against him is procedurally flawed.
The case remains pivotal in the legal battles surrounding the INX Media case, as the Delhi High Court’s decision could influence the trajectory of the money laundering allegations against Chidambaram.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES