MoneyLaundering – ED Seeks Speedy Trial in Chidambaram Cases
MoneyLaundering – The Enforcement Directorate has moved a special court in New Delhi seeking to fast-track proceedings against former Union finance minister P Chidambaram after receiving the Centre’s approval to prosecute him in two separate money laundering cases.
Centre Grants Prosecution Approval
According to officials, the required sanction to prosecute was issued on February 10 in connection with the INX Media and Aircel-Maxis matters. The agency placed the sanction orders before the court on Thursday and urged that the trials be taken up without further delay.
The approval follows a Supreme Court ruling delivered in November 2024. In that judgment, the apex court clarified that prior sanction under Section 197(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is mandatory before prosecuting public servants, even in complaints filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. After the ruling, the ED formally approached the central government to secure the necessary clearance.
Background of the INX Media Case
The investigation into the INX Media case dates back to 2017, when the ED initiated a probe under the PMLA based on a First Information Report registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation. The CBI had named several individuals and entities, including Chidambaram’s son, Karti Chidambaram.
According to the agency, the case revolves around Foreign Investment Promotion Board approvals granted to INX Media during Chidambaram’s tenure as finance minister. Investigators have alleged that the company received approval for foreign investment, which was later regularised, in circumstances that involved suspected irregularities. The ED claims that these approvals were linked to alleged financial benefits.
Allegations in the Aircel-Maxis Deal
In the separate Aircel-Maxis matter, the ED has alleged that foreign direct investment amounting to approximately $800 million was cleared when the proposal required approval at a higher level. The agency contends that the investment, routed from Malaysia-based Maxis into Aircel, exceeded the financial authority vested in the then finance minister.
The investigation agencies have maintained that the approvals granted in both cases raise questions about procedural compliance and financial propriety. The former minister has consistently denied wrongdoing in these matters.
Legal Context and Next Steps
The Supreme Court’s November 2024 decision significantly shaped the current stage of the proceedings. By making prior sanction compulsory for prosecution of public servants under the PMLA, the court set a procedural requirement that investigators had to fulfill before trials could proceed.
With the sanction now in place, the ED has asked the special court to move ahead with the trial process. Legal experts note that the court will now examine the material on record and determine the timeline for framing of charges and further hearings.
Both cases have drawn sustained public attention over the years, given their political and financial implications. However, the judicial process remains ongoing, and the final outcome will depend on evidence presented during trial.
For now, the focus shifts back to the courtroom, where the next phase of legal scrutiny is expected to unfold in the coming months.