The agency told Justice Vipin Sanghi that CBI has the jurisdiction to register and investigate the case in Delhi as the disproportionate assets were allegedly acquired by the Congress leader from the income generated here when he was a Union minister during UPA regime.
"The allegations against him (Singh) are exclusive of his tenure in Delhi," Additional Solicitor General (ASG) P S Patwalia said, adding, "Allegations are very serious. Crores of rupees are involved in this. Money have been shifted from one bank account to other accounts".
Patwalia also alleged that Singh's son had purchased a farm house here in August 2011 for Rs 1.20 crore and Singh had given Rs 90 lakh for this.
"This is nothing but a property acquired by the disproportionate assets of Virbhadra Singh. It (farm house) is situated in Delhi. A number of bank accounts are in Delhi. The income is generated in Delhi as he was posted here. CBI has the jurisdiction to investigate the matter here," he said.
Earlier, Singh's counsel had said in the high court that CBI cannot on its own decide to probe offences outside Delhi without the consent of the concerned state government.
His counsel had contended that in this case, the alleged offence was committed in Himachal Pradesh as disproportionate assets were located there and hence, the police of that state should have been probing it.
Singh had earlier claimed that CBI's FIR was "premature" as it was based on the proceedings of Income Tax department, which were still pending.
October 1, 2015, had restrained the agency from arresting, interrogating or filing a charge sheet against Singh in the case without its permission.
The matter, in which Himachal Pradesh High Court had passed the interim order, was transferred by the Supreme Court to the Delhi High Court, which on April 6 this year had asked CBI not to arrest Singh and directed him to join the probe.
On November 5 last year, the apex court had transferred Singh's plea from Himachal Pradesh HC to Delhi HC, saying it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, but "simply" transferring the petition "in interest of justice and to save the institution (judiciary) from any embarrassment".
A DA case was lodged against the Chief Minister and others by CBI under sections 13(2) and 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and section 109 (punishment for abetment) of the IPC.
