E-Paper
‘Investigation is a science’, says ED seeking Chidambaram’s custody in INX media case
The Supreme Court is hearing a case filed by former Union minister P Chidambaram, a member of the Rajya Sabha, challenging the rejection of his anticipatory bail by the Delhi high court last week.
Listing its reasons for not confronting ex-union minister P Chidambaram with evidence, probe agency Enforcement Directorate (ED) told Supreme Court during the hearing in INX Media case on Thursday that the accused may thereafter erase money trail.
“The moment accused is confronted with the evidence the accused can easily erase money trails.. all are shell companies, money is parked in the name of individuals and benami properties,” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the top court bench of justices R Banumathi and AS Bopanna.
“Extent of revealing evidence to accused is the absolute discretion of probe agency. Confronting him with evidence in pre-anticipatory bail stage would destroy the case,” Mehta added
The Supreme Court is hearing a case filed by the 73-year-old Chidambaram, a member of the Rajya Sabha, challenging the rejection of his anticipatory bail by the Delhi high court last week. He has also filed two more applications against the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) being granted custody of him after his arrest in the same case.
The ED was responding to P Chidambaram’s lawyer Kapil Sibal’s repeated arguments that the agency must confront the Congress leader with evidence. In its counter-argument, the ED told the Supreme Court today that if the agency was to accept the demand it would have wider ramifications on its probe into other cases..
The agency is investigating the cases related to Vijay Mallya, Mehul Choksi, Nirav Modi, Chagan Bhujbal, Zakir Naik, Hafiz Sayeed and Syed Salauddin amonmg others.
“Confrontation would mean exposing agency’s investigation and also to expose the source. Investigation is a science, not a question answer session. If we have ten things we may divulge only three ...this is art of investigation,” the ED argued.
On the reasons for seeking P Chidambaram’s custody, the ED said, “Arrest is not merely made for interrogation purpose. It may be done so that the investigation is smoothly conducted so that witnesses are not influenced or evidence is not tampered with.” Chidambaram has been provided interim protection from arrest in the ED case but the agency has been seeking his custody for ‘proper investigation’. “It is impossible to investigate when the accused is armed with a protective order,’ Mehta said in court.
The former finance minister on Tuesday filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court, denying ED allegations that he had bank accounts or properties abroad, purchased with allegedly laundered money.
