P Chidambaram challenge to case filed by ED: Live Updates from the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is currently hearing the challenge to the Delhi High Court’s refusal to grant anticipatory bail in the Enforcement Directorate’s case filed against former Union Minister P Chidambaram in relation to the INX Media matter..The matter is being heard by a Bench of Justices R Banumathi and AS Bopanna..Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi are arguing for P Chidamabaram. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta is appearing for the Enforcement Directorate (ED)..Live updates of the hearing follow:.Sibal questions the handing over of certain documents in a sealed cover to the Delhi High Court. He says that P Chidambaram was not aware of these documents/notes.It can’t be that they (ED) will hand over any documents they want to the Court without making me privy to the contents, Sibal.The counter affidavit that they were to file was leaked to the press. It is the front page story in the Indian Express today, Sibal says. Tushar Mehta opposes, says they didn’t leak the affidavit but it was leaked after it was served to Chidambaram.Sibal argues on Article 21 and says liberty cannot be denied to a person without due procedure of law. The attempt to produce documents without the accused ever knowing what is being produced is in violation of Fundamental Rights.If they discovered some material between the time FIR was filed and I was arrested, they should have summoned me and interrogated me. They cannot spring it like a surprise in the Court, Sibal.The Will that was spoken about by SG in the earlier hearing is in public domain. The attachment of properties is known. They cannot just make statements like this. ED’s only case is that he is not cooperating. This is not fair, this is media trial, Sibal.SG has contended discovery of large number of mails, bank accounts, among other things. All this was never out to Chidambaram. He was examined by ED thrice and only once by the CBI. Neither agencies put any of this before him.And these documents spoken of is to prejudice the case against Chidambaram. The procedure is not followed and is in violation of Article 21, Sibal.They have to clarify when these documents and notes were discovered. If it was before questioning, why didn’t they confront him? If it was after questioning, then why was he not called again?Even now these questions are not put before him. Only question being asked to him is whether he has an account in the Coutts Bank, Sibal.He’s being asked questions like “Do you have a Twitter account?”… This is the quality of investigation during custodial interrogation, Sibal.SG says Chidambaram is being evasive, but the Court should peruse the questions that were put to him and the responses given by him to ascertain if he was being evasive, Sibal says..Post Lunch Session.The court assembles to resume hearing in the case. Senior Counsel Kapil Sibal continues with his arguments.The case is that Karti Chidambaram used his relationship with P Chidambaram to influence public servants to secure ex-post-facto FIPB approvals for the downstream investment in INX media, Kapil SibalAll the then six FIPB secretaries have been examined and none of them said that Karti Chidambaram approached them, Sibal.Statements of these officers are also part of the attachment proceedings where they have said that Karti never approached them, SibalTheir case talks about Advantage Strategies but Karti is neither a Director of the company nor a shareholder, Sibal.The CA Bhaskar Raman got bail, Karti Chidambaram got bail, Indrani and Peter Mukherjea are on default bail and no sanctions have been sought for the six government secretaries till now, SibalP Chidambaram is being made vicariously liable. The ED’s case seems to be that since he’s Karti’s father, he must be involved… There is no charge sheet filed naming him so prima facie no offence has been committed, Sibal.Sibal cites the judgment of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Gurbaksh Singh on the issue of the right of an accused for anticipatory bail.Sibal again raises the issue of documents put before the High Court in a sealed cover by the ED.If there is a money trail, there must be documents and the source of the monies traceable. What are they trying to find out? First probe, find out and then seek custody, SibalIf something is found after probing documents, it should be put before the accused for him to give an explanation. Here it’s a one-way street where documents are produced in Court but not put before accused, SibalGreat ignominy and humiliation is attached to an arrest. The moment someone is arrested, you destroy that man. You make believe that the man is guilty. That is what is happening here, SibalOn the Delhi High Court, Sibal says what is the application of mind of the Judge when certain paragraphs are a word for word, comma for comma copy of the note submitted by the Solicitor General?SG Tushar Mehta intervenes, “I don’t know where they got this note from. It was not in record”Sibal responds to SG, you have not even denied the note.Is there no counter to that note? – Justice BanumathiNo – SibalThese are not documents, these are conclusions. How can a decision of the High Court be based on such conclusions? – Sibal, referring to the note.SG Tushar Mehta requests to take a look at the note Sibal has been referring to. “We have not filed this note. We have placed case diaries”, Mehta says after seeing the noteThe Delhi High Court Judge says the petitioner is the “kingpin”. On what grounds is he saying this, SibalHe says on what grounds… You are questioning a Constitutional body so I have to interject, SG Tushar Mehta.Am I not entitled to question the judgment, SibalThe case diary which is the basis for the judgment and that is exactly what I want to produce before the Court today, SG MehtaThat is exactly my objection that while he (SG) can put whatever he wishes before the Court but it should be put before me first. These are the procedural issues that need to be addressed in a case which involves personal liberty, SibalThe HC judgment also mentions the Aircel Maxis case. Now what has that case got to do with this matter? – SibalThere is also another serious issue that why was the order reserved for seven months? It took him (Justice Sunil Gaur of the High Court) 7 months to decide that there was gravity in the matter, SibalTheir case is, and it is mentioned in the judgment, that Chidambaram has been evasive during questioning, then Your Lordships must ask for transcripts and decide if he was being evasive, SibalThey (investigating agencies) are saying that they have cogent evidence against the petitioner and at the same time they say that evidence is yet to be unearthed. Then what is this cogent evidence then? – SibalHow does any Court come to the conclusion that this requires my custodial interrogation? – SibalLet them give at least one bank account and one property details and the link between that and P Chidambaram, SibalI’ll show all account details, SG Tushar MehtaIt is not relevant what I was in the past but what is relevant is how the agencies are conducting the proceedings, SibalThey are claiming that there is an apprehension of tampering of evidence. Tampering of what? Properties situated outside? Or bank accounts? If that tampering is possible, my arms must be really long, SibalYes, that’s what it shows that tampering was done, SG Tushar Mehta.I mean your arms are much longer than mine which is why you are there and I’m here arguing this case, SibalLet’s assume that I have tampered with the evidence, then that’s fait accompli, they should prove it in the Court of Law, Sibal.Sibal citing some judgments to buttress his case.Supreme Court to continue hearing the case tomorrow at 12 noon. P Chidambaram to file a rejoinder to the ED’s affidavit. challenge to the Enforcement Directorate’s case from arrest granted to Chidambaram (in the ED case) to continue till tomorrow.