INX case: ED moves HC seeking rectification of inadvertent error in Chidambaram's bail order

The ED in its application urged the court to correct the 'accidental slip/inadvertent error' that is there in the November 15 verdict passed by Justice Suresh Kait.

Published: 18th November 2019 01:09 PM  |   Last Updated: 18th November 2019 02:13 PM   |  A+A-

Former Finance Minister P Chidambaram

Former Finance Minister P Chidambaram (Photo | PTI)


NEW DELHI: The Enforcement Directorate on Monday approached the Delhi High Court seeking rectification of an "inadvertent" error in the order denying bail to former Union finance minister P Chidambaram in the INX Media money laundering case.

The ED in its application urged the court to correct the "accidental slip/inadvertent error" in the November 15 verdict passed by Justice Suresh Kait.

Kait has reproduced some paragraphs from a 2017 Supreme Court order rejecting bail to Delhi-based lawyer Rohit Tandon in a money laundering case, as per the application.

The error was in four paragraphs of the 41-page judgment given by Justice Kait.

The judge also referred to a 2017 high court order in the Tandon versus ED case in which it was observed that "there is a provision of trial by special courts in case of 'schedule offences' under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Possibility of a joint trial would arise under Section 44 of the PMLA only when a charge sheet is filed upon completion of an investigation and the case is committed to a special court.

The ED, in its plea filed through the central government's standing counsel Amit Mahajan and advocate Rabat Nair, sought correction of the errors which "inadvertently and due to accidental slip have crept in paragraphs 35, 36, 39 and 40 of the order."

"It appears that the factual assertions which have been attributed to the respondent ED as part of its submissions forms part of one of the judgments which was relied on by it during the course of arguments.

ALSO READ | INX Media case: Chidambaram moves SC against HC order dismissing bail plea

"Inadvertently, it appears that the said factual portion of the judgment relied by the ED instead of being quoted or summarised as the part of the relied upon judgments, have been inadvertently/ accidently referred to in the order dated November 15 as the factual submissions made by the ED," the application said.

The ED clarified that it has not placed those facts as part of its submission in support of the argument for rejection of bail to Chidambaram.

It said the facts of Tandon's case are neither a part of the investigation papers of Chidambaram's case nor were remotely relatable to the probe undertaken by the ED in this case.

Tandon, who was arrested in 2016, is an accused in the demonetisation-related money laundering case.

The senior Congress leader moved the Supreme Court on Monday challenging the Delhi High Court's Friday order denying him bail in the money laundering case.

In the INX Media money-laundering case, the ED had arrested 74-year-old Chidambaram on October 16.

He was arrested by the CBI on August 21 in the INX Media corruption case and was granted bail by the Supreme Court in the CBI case on October 22.

The case was registered by the CBI on May 15, 2017, alleging irregularities in a Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance granted to the INX Media group for receiving overseas funds of Rs 305 crore in 2007, during Chidambaram's tenure as finance minister.

Thereafter, the ED had lodged a money-laundering case in this regard in 2017.

Stay up to date on all the latest Nation news with The New Indian Express App. Download now


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

  • v.o.Hari

    Nowadays Court orders are prepared from PMO it seems.
    4 months ago reply
flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp