CBI not keen to expedite INX media case against Chidambarams, says Delhi court
The court noted that its earlier order directing the CBI to supply documents of the case is yet to be challenged before the high court.
NEW DELHI: The Rouse Avenue Court on Friday asked the CBI probe in-charge to personally appear before the court to explain the non-compliance of its earlier order in relation to the alleged INX Media corruption case, saying the investigating agency is “not interested” in getting proceedings of the case expedited.“It appears to this court that the prosecuting agency itself is not interested in getting proceedings of this case expedited and the same are being delayed without any reasonable justification,” the court observed.
“Hence, the concerned DIG or SP of CBI, who is in-charge of this case, shall be personally present before this court on the next date to explain the above,” Special Judge MK Nagpal said while posting the matter for hearing on December 4.The court said, “on one or the other pretext”, time was gained by CBI to challenge its order made on March 5 last year.The court noted that its earlier order directing the CBI to supply documents of the case is yet to be challenged before the high court.
On July 18 this year, the Supreme Court had refused the CBI’s plea challenging another special court order directing it to allow inspection of the documents kept in ‘Malkhana’ (room keeping case properties) by all the accused, including Congress leaders P Chidambaram and his son Karti Chidambaram, and their counsel.
CBI had registered a case on May 15, 2017, alleging irregularities in a Foreign Investment Promotion Board clearance granted to INX Media group for receiving foreign funds of Rs 305 crore in 2007 during Chidambaram’s tenure as finance minister. ED too had lodged a money laundering case.
DU rapped for affidavit on PwD Act implementation
The Delhi High Court granted a last opportunity to University of Delhi to file a comprehensive affidavit on implementation of provisions of Right of Persons with Disability Act. The court also asked the university to file the affidavit to satisfy how the suggestions of the amicus curiae on physical infrastructure and accessibility for persons with disability have been implemented in the Campus Law Centre (CLC). It was informed by the counsel for the university that the work for repair in toilets, corridors, open areas and provision of tactile and other facilities for persons with disabilities at CLC has been completed by the agency.