News Updates

P Chidambaram Moves Delhi HC to Challenge Judicial Custody In INX Media Case

11 Sep 2019 11:56 AM GMT
P Chidambaram Moves Delhi HC to Challenge Judicial Custody In INX Media Case
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

P Chidambaram has moved an application under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, before the Delhi High Court, in order to challenge the CBI court's order dated 05.09.2019 which subjected him to a judicial custody of 14 days.

The Application puts forward the following grounds to set aside the order of the trial court:

  1. Trial court failed to appreciate that it is settled law that if police custody remand is not extended, then judicial custody remand is not an automatic consequence and it is obligatory for the Judge to apply his judicial mind and not to pass an order of remand automatically or in a mechanical manner.
  2. The reasons given by the trial court reflect non-application of judicial mind
  3. Trial court did not consider the nature of the offence and passed the order on vague and ambiguous grounds
  4. Trial court failed to appreciate that the nature of the offences in the instant case are not serious and in fact, are punishable only with a maximum imprisonment of up to 7 year
  5. Trial court did not consider the fact that no single officer could control the FIPB clearances to FDI proposals
  6. Trial Court failed to appreciate that in any event, the offences are yet to be tested even prima facie and therefore, remanding the Petitioner to judicial custody amounts to pre-trial conviction and punishment.
  7. The grant of judicial custody remand on the basis of mere apprehensions of the CBI of tampering with evidence and influencing the witnesses is patently illegal.
  8. Trial court failed to appreciate the fact that there's neither a flight risk or the risk of tampering with evidence in the present case

Earlier, CBI Court subjected P Chidambaram to judicial custody of 14 days till September 09 on grounds that the charges against him reflected a serious offence and there was a possibility of tampering with evidence.

It also argued in the application that Chidambaram is politically persecuted for being a political opponent of the party in power and it is a clear case of political vendetta.

Moreover, an instant criminal proceeding is mala fide and is borne out of political vendetta, and that the Investigating Agency is acting at the behest of the Central Government, which wants to malign the untainted and unimpeachable reputation of the Petitioner.

Next Story
Share it