Stop “continued harassment” by CBI, ED; P Chidambaram moves SC under Article 32

Senior advocate and Former Union Minister P Chidambaram has moved the Supreme Court under Article 32 alleging violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19 and 21 by the Central government..In a petition filed through advocate Anupam Lal Das, Chidambaram has claimed that Central government is misusing its investigating agencies, CBI and ED to harass him in relation to Aircel-Maxis case and the INX-Media case..“The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Central Government, misusing its agencies, has violated the Petitioner’s fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.”.He has alleged that his two residences, one at Chennai and the other in Delhi have been repeatedly searched by the two investigating agencies without authority of law and in utter abuse of powers..Claiming that during the searches of the two residential premises or the office premises of the Petitioner’s son, nothing of incriminating nature was seized by any of the agencies, Chidambaram proceeds to set out the factual matrix of the two cases – Aircel Maxis case and INX Media case..The Aircel-Maxis case and the INX Media case relate to approvals granted by the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) under the Ministry of Finance. The FIPB is authorised to consider proposals of investor/investee companies for Foreign Direct Investment that require the approval of the government. The FIPB has formulated its own rules and guidelines..The FIPB, at a meeting of its members, considers each proposal and makes a recommendation for approval or rejection. The recommendation is placed before the competent authority, who is the Finance Minister in the vast majority of cases..It is Chidambaram’s case that in the two cases, Aircel-Maxis and INX Media, the FIPB had placed its recommendation for approval before Chidambaram, who was then the Finance Minister, and he had granted his approval in the normal course of official business. It is his contention that he never allowed any member of his family, including his son, or any other person to interfere with or influence the conduct of official business..“In the two cases that are the subject matter of this petition, the Petitioner considered the recommendations for approval submitted by the FIPB in the cases of Aircel-Maxis and INX Media and granted his approval in the normal course of official business. In the discharge of his functions, the Petitioner has never allowed any member of his family, including his son, or any other person to interfere with or influence the conduct of official business. The Petitioner has, through all his tenures in government, zealously guarded his reputation for integrity and has never allowed any stain on his integrity.”.On Aircel-Maxis Approval .Regarding this case, Chidambaram has cited the statements of several officers connected with FIPB. He has stated that these officers affirmed that the approval granted by Chidambaram, was in order..“The Petitioner learns and states that several officers connected with the FIPB, including the then Secretary, Shri Ashok Jha, IAS and the then Additional Secretary, Shri Ashok Chawla, IAS appeared before the CBI and made statements. The Petitioner understands and states that each one of the persons who made statements to the CBI categorically affirmed that the approval granted by the then Finance Minister was perfectly in order and he was the competent authority to grant the approval.”.Further, Chidambaram has also cited the statements of DK Singh, the then Director, FIPB and Ram Sharan, the then Under Secretary, FIPB who had told the ED that the grant of approval by Chidambaram was as per the policy prevailing in 2006..He has submitted that, till date, there is no FIR filed by the CBI and there is no ECIR filed by the ED in the Aircel-Maxis case where either Chidambaram or his son has been named as an accused or even as a suspect..“It is pertinent to reiterate that the FIR filed by the CBI and the ECIR filed by the ED in that case, as well as the charge sheets filed by the two agencies, had not named either the Petitioner or his son as an accused, or even as a suspect, in any criminal wrongdoing.”.The INX Media proposal.Chidambaram has taken the stand that approval granted in this case too was in the normal course of business..“M/s INX Media Private Ltd applied to the FIPB for approval to issue equity shares and redeemable preference shares by way of preferential allotment and also to make a downstream investment. FIPB recommended for approval the issue of equity shares and redeemable preference shares but did not recommend the downstream investment. The Petitioner accorded his approval to the recommendation in the normal course of official business.” .It is his contention that the CBI registered an FIR against his son based on “alleged oral source information” and the allegations contained in the FIR are totally imaginary, fat-fetched and improbable..“The allegations contained in the CBI’s FIR against the Petitioner’s son are totally imaginary, farfetched and highly improbable. Even on a bare reading of the FIR, it would be clear that the Petitioner’s son has been deliberately drawn into a small, routine commercial transaction between two private companies for a paltry sum of Rs.10 lakh.”.Income Tax Department and sale of “cured coffee”.Interestingly, Chidambaram has also adverted to the act of IT Department in issuing re-assessment notices to him, his wife, son and daughter-in-law for alleged sale of “cured coffee”..As owners of coffee-estates, they sell coffee after ‘pulping’ and ‘drying’. It is his argument that no “curing” is done because curing requires works/ machinery and is a specialised function..Despite the same, re-assessment notices were issued by the IT Department to the Petitioner, his wife, his son and his daughter-in-law alleging that they had sold ‘cured coffee’ and hence 25 per cent of the income was assessable to tax as non-agricultural income..“Never before has it been alleged against any coffee grower who sells coffee after pulping and drying that he/she had sold ‘cured coffee’. .An RTI application revealed that no other coffee grower in Tamil Nadu or Karnataka had been re-assessed in this manner”, the petition states..Absence of jurisdiction.Contending that there is no FIR in Aircel-Maxis case in which the Petitioner or his son has been named as an accused or even as a suspect, Chidambaram has also stated that after investigating for nearly 4 years, the CBI has not found that any offence has been committed by any public servant in the grant of FIPB approval. Consequently, there are no ‘proceeds of crime’ arising out of the commission of the scheduled offence. Hence, the ED has no jurisdiction to investigate the offence of ‘money laundering’.Regarding the INX Media case, it is Chidambaram’s argument that although the CBI registered an FIR, it has not filed a report concluding that any criminal offence has been committed or that any proceeds of crime had arisen out of that criminal offence. The ED can investigate the offence of ‘money laundering’ under PMLA only if the CBI concludes the commission of a ‘scheduled offence’ and ‘proceeds of crime’.“In the present case, the ED has jumped the gun and is purporting to investigate the offence of money laundering without the CBI having first reached a conclusion that a criminal offence had been committed. The ED has gone to the extent of arresting a person who was not named in the FIR when the CBI has not thought it fit to arrest any person.”.Prayers.Chidambaram has made, inter alia, the following prayers:.(a) A writ of prohibition prohibiting the Respondents 3 and 4 from continuing the illegal investigations and from acting in any manner causing repeated harassment to the Petitioner and the members of his family including his son, relating to the grant of FIPB approval to M/s Global Communication Holding Services Ltd., Mauritius by the Petitioner in the 78th Meeting of the FIPB held on 7th March 2006;.(b) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents 3 and 4 that they shall comply with the provisions of the Constitution and the laws and shall cease the continued harassment of the Petitioner and the members of his family, including his son;.(c) A writ, order or direction declaring that the proceedings emanating from FIR instituted by the CBI in RC No.220 2017 E 0011 of 2017 dated 15-05-2017 in the INX Media case as well as the premature investigation being made by the Enforcement Directorate in ECIR/7/HIU/2017 in the said INX Media case are without jurisdiction, an abuse of authority, and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution which inhere in the Petitioner and the members of his family, and declare the said proceedings and investigations as null and void;.Read the petition below..Image taken from here.