“Inadvertent Error” In Freezing Karti Chidambaram's Wife's Accounts While Probing Him: SFIO Tells NCLT Chennai

The Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) has conceded before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Chennai that an “inadvertent error” on its part led to the freezing of the bank accounts of Dr Srinidhi Karti Chidambaram, wife of former MP Karti P Chidambaram.

The attachment arose from SFIO's November 4 ex-parte order in its disgorgement proceedings linked to Advantage Strategic Consulting Pvt. Ltd. (ASCPL), a company alleged to be controlled by Karti and examined in the Aircel Maxis and 2G spectrum related investigations.

After the concession, the tribunal pulled up the agency, noting that SFIO had still not complied with its December 3 order requiring it to furnish verification details by December 9.

The coram of Judicial Member Jyoti Kumar Tripathi and Technical Member Ravichandran Ramasamy observed that SFIO not complied with the December 3 order directing it to carry out the verification, and asked the agency to do the needful at the earliest.

“This is a serious matter. Please put your resources together and get it done overnight,” adding that it was hearing the issue for the third time and would not allow further delay.

During today's hearing, SFIO's counsel stated that Srinidhi's accounts, including a joint account with her 85 year old mother-in-law, were frozen because the agency mistakenly entered her PAN instead of Karti's.

“It was an inadvertent error. It was not intentional,” counsel submitted, adding that the number had been supplied based on Karti's own deposition in February 2024. SFIO sought two more days to file the corrected material.

The tribunal was unpersuaded. It noted Srindhi's counsel's argument that SFIO had already used Karti's correct PAN on November 12 to freeze his accounts and questioned why the agency had failed to return to the tribunal to correct the error affecting Srinidhi.

“If you have done the verification, it is within your ability to tell us immediately,” the bench said, observing that the agency was “delaying the matter” and that correction must happen “quickly, at once.”

The tribunal also reminded SFIO that it cannot seek “weeks” to complete the verification, telling counsel that in the “digital world” it should be able to file correct details without delay.

When SFIO requested time till Friday, the bench responded that it would rather have heard the matter “tomorrow itself” and insisted that the report be filed by Thursday. “We are very serious about it,” the bench said before fixing the next hearing for Friday.

Appearing for Srinidhi, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra argued that SFIO had failed to comply with any of the court's directions and had taken no steps to issue correct instructions to banks. He said the agency had frozen Srinidhi's accounts “solely on the basis of an incorrect PAN” and pointed out that SFIO had already accessed the correct PAN when freezing Karti's accounts.

He added that SFIO had neither pleaded nor produced any material connecting Srinidhi or her companies to ASCPL and that even a joint account with her elderly mother-in-law had been frozen. Luthra argued that the agency was aware of the correct PAN and that its claim that verification was still required was not fair to the court.

He referred the tribunal to pages in his application showing that SFIO had attached Chess Management Services Pvt. Ltd. based on Karti's PAN.

SFIO said it had maintained the data but there had been an inadvertent mistake in adding the PAN. The tribunal responded that SFIO must state clearly which accounts should not have been attached and that it expected the agency to put together “whatever resources” were needed to correct the error immediately.

The background of the dispute stems from SFIO's petition seeking disgorgement of about Rs 48 crore, which it alleges represent unlawful gains flowing to ASCPL and related companies following the 2017 investigation ordered by the central government. Acting on directions from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, SFIO obtained the November 4 ex parte order freezing accounts of ASCPL and accounts linked to Karti, which inadvertently included those of his wife and companies not named in its original prayers.

Taking note of the error, the tribunal said it must be corrected “at the earliest” and that the agency “cannot delay” furnishing the information. The tribunal directed that the corrected details be filed on or before December 11, 2025. The matter will be heard again on December 12, 2025.

Case Title: Union of India through Serious Fraud Investigation Office vs Advantage Strategic Consulting Private Limited (ASCPL) & 1 Another

Case Number: CP/110(CHE)2025