English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

INX Media case: Chidambaram denied protection from arrest by HC, may move Supreme Court

Published

on

INX Media case: Chidambaram denied protection from arrest by HC, may move Supreme Court

Congress leader and former finance minister P Chidambaram’s plea seeking anticipatory bail in the corruption and money-laundering cases related to INX Media case was rejected by the Delhi High Court today (Tuesday, Aug 20).

Chidambaram’s lawyers are likely to approach the Supreme Court.

Chidambaram’s role had come under the scanner of the investigating agencies in the Rs 3,500-crore Aircel-Maxis deal and the INX Media case involving Rs 305 crore. It was during his tenure as finance minister in the UPA-I government that clearances from the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) were given to the two ventures.

The CBI on May 15, 2017 had registered an FIR against alleged irregularities in the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance to INX Media for receiving overseas funds to the tune of Rs 305 crore in 2007 when Chidambaram was the Finance Minister.

Thereafter, the ED had in 2018 lodged the money laundering case in this regard. The Enforcement Directorate had contended that the companies in which money was transferred are directly or indirectly controlled by Chidambaram’s son, Karti, and they have a reason to believe that the FIPB approval was granted to INX Media on his son’s intervention.

Also Read: Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister nephew Ratul Puri arrested in bank fraud case: Congress claims move ‘politically motivated’

The high court had on July 25, 2018 granted interim protection from arrest to Chidambaram in both the cases and it was extended from time to time.

Vacating the order today, Justice Sunil Gaur said, “Both applications (seeking anticipatory bail) are dismissed.”

Senior advocate Dayan Krishnan urged the court that at least two-three days more protection be given to his client. The judge said that it will consider.

The case pertains to alleged financial irregularities in clearances granted when Chidambaram was the Union finance minister. His son Karti Chidambaram is also an accused in the case and was arrested by the CBI on February 28 last year. Later he was granted bail by the Delhi High Court in March.

The Enforcement Directorate has questioned Karti on several occasions in the INX Media case case. P Chidambaram was also questioned by the ED in January this year and on December 19 last year.

The ED has attached properties worth Rs 54 crore belonging to Karti Chidambaram in connection with the case. The agency also attached properties belonging to Indrani and Peter Mukerjea.

On May 31 last year, the former finance minister had moved court, seeking interim protection from arrest in the alleged INX Media corruption case. Subsequently, he was given protection from arrest.

Chidambaram’s petition had said that though no summons had ever been served on him by the ED in this case, he had an apprehension of arrest in view of the summons issued to him by the CBI, which was investigating the scheduled offence.

Chidambaram in his plea before the high court had said that he does not have a copy of the FIR registered by the ED as it has not been provided to him till date.

“He came to know about registration of the FIR from various summons received by his son from the ED, directing Karti to join the investigation,” it had said.

The plea had claimed that during the investigation of the ED’s case, which has been going on for over a year, no summon has been issued to Chidambaram till date, let alone any allegation of him evading the process of law or fleeing from the process of law or interfering with the investigation in any manner.

Also Read: Delhi High Court issues notice to Centre on Shah Faesal’s detention

“There is not even a slightest whisper about his tampering with any evidence or hampering/impeding the process of investigation,” it had said, while seeking the relief.

The CBI had earlier told the court that Chidambaram was needed for custodial interrogation in the INX Media case.

On July 4, a Delhi court had also allowed Indrani Mukerjea, the former head of the INX Media, to turn an approver in the CBI case.

Indrani Mukerjea and her husband Peter Mukherjea, who co-founded INX Media in 2007, had been charged with entering into a criminal conspiracy with Karti Chidambaram, whose father P Chidambaram was the then finance minister, to get foreign investments and evade punitive measures for not having the necessary approvals from the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB).

In March 2018, Indrani Mukerjea told the CBI in a statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC that a deal of $1 million was struck between Karti Chidambaram and the Mukerjeas to secure approval from the FIPB in favour of INX Media. Last month, a Delhi court had allowed Indrani Mukerjea, who is a prime accused in the murder of her daughter Sheena Bora, to turn approver in the INX case.

In her application to turn approver, Mukerjea had prayed for pardon in the case in exchange of full and true disclosure.

India News

Supreme Court questions EC over missing records in Sringeri election dispute

The Supreme Court questioned the Election Commission over missing video footage of the 2023 counting in Karnataka’s Sringeri constituency. The case involves a revised result following a recount of postal ballots.

Published

on

The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the Election Commission of India (ECI) over its inability to locate video recordings of the original vote counting in Karnataka’s Sringeri Assembly constituency in 2023. The court said it would not accept what it described as “lame excuses” and directed the poll body to produce whatever records are available at the next hearing.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva expressed displeasure after the Election Commission’s counsel informed it that the footage of the original counting could not be traced.

The bench also warned that it could draw an adverse inference if the required documents were not produced.

Questioning how the poll body could lose records relating to an election it had conducted, the judges stressed that maintaining election documentation was central to its responsibilities.

“How can the Election Commission of India say that it has lost the records? Your whole purpose is to hold an election, and you need to have a document. Where is the question of you saying we are trying to trace it?” the bench asked.

“We will not accept these kinds of lame excuses,” it added.

What is the Sringeri election dispute?

The case stems from the 2023 Karnataka Assembly election in Sringeri, where Congress leader TD Rajegowda was initially declared the winner.

The result was challenged by BJP candidate Jeevaraj before the Karnataka High Court. The High Court later ordered a recount of postal ballots, including the reverification of 279 rejected postal votes.

Following the recount, the Returning Officer declared a revised result in which Jeevaraj was declared the winner. Rajegowda then approached the Supreme Court to challenge the revised outcome.

In May, the Supreme Court granted interim relief to Rajegowda, directing that he continue as the Member of the Legislative Assembly while his plea remained pending.

Rajegowda seeks counting records and observer’s report

Rajegowda has sought access to the election observer’s report and video recordings of both the original counting conducted in 2023 and the recount held this year.

The missing original counting footage became a point of concern during Wednesday’s hearing, with the bench questioning the Election Commission’s inability to trace the recording.

The court directed the Commission to submit whatever records it possesses at the next hearing. Its warning about a possible adverse inference underscores the importance the bench attached to the production of the requested documents.

The court has scheduled the next hearing for February 15, 2027.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi joins India Gate protest by Ankita Bhandari’s parents

Rahul Gandhi joined the protest by Ankita Bhandari’s parents at India Gate in New Delhi on October 14. The demonstration has brought renewed attention to the 2022 murder case and the family’s concerns following Dushyant Gautam’s appointment as Sikkim Governor.

Published

on

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi joined a protest by the parents of Ankita Bhandari at India Gate in New Delhi on Wednesday, October 14, bringing renewed attention to the 2022 murder case from Uttarakhand.

The family’s demonstration follows the appointment of Dushyant Gautam, a former BJP leader associated with the party’s Uttarakhand organisation, as Governor of Sikkim. The appointment has prompted objections from Ankita’s family and political leaders, who have raised concerns about the case and the demand for justice.

Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra also met the family, according to reports.

Why Ankita Bhandari’s family is protesting

Ankita Bhandari, 19, worked as a receptionist at a resort in Uttarakhand. She was murdered in September 2022, and the case triggered widespread public anger and demands for accountability.

The protest has returned to the spotlight amid questions raised by the family and activists over the alleged role of a VIP in the case. These allegations and demands should be distinguished from findings established through the criminal proceedings.

Dushyant Gautam’s appointment as Sikkim Governor has become a fresh point of contention because his name has been linked to allegations surrounding the alleged VIP connection. Such allegations should not be treated as proof of involvement in the crime.

Political reactions and demand for justice

Rahul Gandhi’s participation brought the Congress leadership into the family’s latest protest in the national capital. The demonstration reflects continuing demands for accountability and further clarity over the concerns raised by the family.

The case has remained a subject of public and political debate, including questions about the investigation and the alleged VIP connection. The family’s concerns and the political reactions have renewed attention on the demand for justice for Ankita Bhandari.

Continue Reading

India News

Meerut murder: Muskaan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla get death sentence

A Meerut court has sentenced Muskaan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla to death in the blue drum murder case involving the killing of merchant navy officer Saurabh Rajput in March 2025.

Published

on

A court in Meerut has sentenced Muskaan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla to death for the murder of Saurabh Rajput, Muskaan’s husband and a former Merchant Navy officer. The sentencing was pronounced on Wednesday, October 14, 2026, after the court convicted the two in the case widely known as the Meerut blue drum murder.

The case involved the killing of Rajput in March 2025 and the concealment of his dismembered remains inside a blue plastic drum sealed with cement and sand.

The two were convicted on September 30. The prosecution had sought the death penalty, arguing for the maximum punishment in the case.

Court verdict follows 126 hearings

The trial involved 126 hearings and statements from 22 prosecution witnesses. District Judge Arvind Kumar Mishra delivered the sentence after the court considered the evidence presented during the proceedings.

The investigation and prosecution relied on a combination of circumstantial, technical and physical evidence. This included forensic findings, witness testimony and material recovered during the investigation.

The case drew attention after police discovered Rajput’s remains inside the cement-filled drum at the couple’s residence in Meerut.

How Saurabh Rajput was killed

According to the prosecution’s account of the case, Rajput was killed in March 2025 after he returned to Meerut from London. Investigators alleged that Muskaan and Sahil had planned the murder.

The prosecution said Rajput was given food laced with sleeping medication before he was attacked. His body was subsequently dismembered, and the remains were placed inside a blue plastic drum.

The drum was filled with a mixture containing cement and sand and sealed. Investigators later recovered the remains from inside it.

Evidence presented during the investigation

Investigators built the case using several strands of evidence. Shopkeepers provided testimony about the purchase of materials, including a blue drum, cement, sand and cutting implements, before the murder.

Call detail records and mobile tower information were also cited to establish Sahil’s presence at the residence around the time of the crime. The prosecution further relied on post-mortem findings that confirmed Rajput had died from stab injuries.

The investigation also traced the movements of Muskaan and Sahil during their trip to Himachal Pradesh following the killing. Investigators said photographs and activity linked to Rajput’s phone were used to create the impression that he was still alive.

The case came to light in March 2025

The murder came to light after questions arose over Rajput’s whereabouts. According to the investigation, the couple’s attempt to move the heavy drum eventually raised suspicion.

Rajput’s family approached the police, leading to an investigation that uncovered the remains. Muskaan and Sahil were arrested in March 2025.

The sentencing on October 14 marks a major development in the case, which had proceeded from the discovery of Rajput’s remains to a trial involving dozens of witness statements and more than a hundred hearings.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com