ALSO READSupreme Court to see CBI's documents on Karti's foreign account, properties INX Media case: Karti Chidambaram appears before CBI for questioning INX media FIPB clearance: SC to hear plea against Karti Chidambaram today INX Media case: Karti Chidambaram requests SC to allow him to travel abroad INX Media case: SC to decide CBI's appeal against Karti on Sept 18
The case against Karti, which pertains to allege that he illegally took service charges for getting the FIPB clearance to INX Media for receiving funds from abroad worth Rs 305 crore in 2007 when his father P.
Arguing in the court against the lookout notice used by Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which prevents Karti from travelling outside India, Sibal told that though Karti went abroad but he came back to India again.
The senior lawyer further argued that there is just an FIR against karti in the INX media case and nothing has been proved against him yet.
Denying Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) allegation of multiple foreign bank accounts, Karti earlier told the Supreme Court that he had only one account in the United Kingdom's Metro Bank and one property in that country.
Meanwhile, the probe agency, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), demanded that the Supreme Court should first peruse the documents submitted by it in a sealed envelope regarding the case.
The Apex Court has agreed to examine these documents to ascertain whether documents are relevant to the case or not.
Former Union Minister P Chidambaram's son Karti Chidambaram on Monday sought the Apex Court's intervention for a direction to go abroad for her daughter's admission in Cambridge University.
A look out notice issued by CBI on July 18 prevents Karti from travelling abroad without the investigating agency's permission.
The probing agency has alleged that there were official records to show that Karti had tampered with evidence against him in the INX media case on his visits abroad.
He had approached the top court earlier challenging the lookout notice.
The apex court, however, did not pass any order today in the matter and has adjourned it for further hearing to tomorrow.