AgustaWestland: Special CBI court reserves order in Christian Michel’s bail plea

A Special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Court today reserved its order in the bail plea of British businessman Christian Michel, the alleged middleman in the AgustaWestland scam..The order will be pronounced by Special CBI Judge at Patiala House Court Arvind Kumar on December 22..Counsel for Michel, Advocates Aljo K Joseph, Sriram Parakkat and Vishnu Shankar, raised three grounds, namely excessive remand period, humanitarian grounds, and violation of international treaties to secure bail for Michel, who is currently in CBI custody..Joseph submitted that given the prolonged custody that Michel has been subjected to – first in Dubai due to the extradition proceedings and then in India after his arrest – he is physically and mentally weak..Joseph further argued that Michel has been extending his cooperation to the investigating agencies since 2016 voluntarily and has even produced all the documents in the case..He also brought on record the Forensic Audit Report of the Commission appointed by the Italian Court in the matter to assert Michel’s bona fides..It was further argued that the purpose of Michel’s custody, i.e to get his handwriting sample, has already been achieved by the CBI. Joseph objected to the practice by stating that the main accused in the case, Guido Haschke, has already admitted that the document sought to be matched with Michel’s handwriting was written by him, and therefore it would never match..Joseph further asserted that all the documents in the case were already part of the Court records in Italy, and with the Agency. Therefore, there was no risk of Michel tampering with the documents..He also urged that since the other co-accused in the case were already on bail, Michel must also be granted bail in the matter..Sriram Parakkat argued on the violation of international treaties. He argued that the present proceedings were in violation of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Commercial Transactions..Even if India was not a signatory to these treaties, it would be bound by customary international law, and acceptance of criminal proceedings of another foreign nation was one such principle under the same, he stated..He asserted that all the facts in the matter were already subject to a trial in Italy, which had acquitted Michel. By participating in the said proceedings, Indian authorities had renounced their jurisdiction in the matter, he said..Sriram also read out an excerpt from the judgment of the Italian Court which had acquitted Michel for lack of evidence..Joseph and Sriram submitted that Michel would cooperate with the investigation and abide by any condition that may be imposed at the time of granting bail..Special Prosecutor DP Singh strongly objected to the bail application. He stated that India was not a party to the two Conventions cited by Michel, and that they had no applicability to the present case..He further clarified that the CBI’s role before the Italian Court was limited, as the Court did not consider the material from the Indian side. CBI received documents from the Court “only in due course of time”, he said..He further rebutted the claim that Michel has been cooperating with the investigation. He stated that Michel has not joined the present proceeding after the Court’s summon, but has been forced to do so after being extradited from Dubai..The CBI also raised an apprehension that if released on bail, Michel might tamper with the evidence or abscond..After being extradited to India, Michel was produced before the Patiala House Court on December 5. The Court had sent him to CBI custody for five days. On subsequent hearings, the custody was extended for another five days, and then four more days.