When the petition came up for hearing today on the question of maintainability, Justice P Velmurugan, after hearing arguments by both sides, adjourned it to July 28 without passing any interim order.
The CBI had on July 19 issued the summons asking Karti to be present today for questioning in the matter related to alleged irregularities in Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance given to media group INX Media for receiving funds from Mauritius when his father was the finance minister.
This was the second summons issued by CBI in the case. Earlier, it had asked Karti and four others to appear for questioning on June 27 and 29. He had then informed the CBI through his lawyer that he needed more time to appear.
In the court today, the CBI opposed the petition arguing it was not maintainable.
Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the CBI, contended that the summons had been issued well within the jurisdiction and investigating powers of the CBI.
Senior Counsel Goal Subramaniam, representing Karti, submitted it was a settled principle of law that issuing summons to an accused and interrogating him would amount to violation of fundamental right guaranteed under Article 20(3) of the Constitution.
He said the article states that no person accused of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
"The Article grants immunity from self incrimination. Thus the instant summons is only to make the petitioner make self-incriminating statements when it is the case of the petitioner that he has not met any official in the ministry of finance for any purpose much less for FIPB approval for the INX group," he said.
An FIR has been registered against Karti and INX Media along with eight others for alleged irregularities in FIPB clearance given to the media house for receiving foreign direct investment (FDI) in 2007.
The probe agency had claimed that the FDI proposal of the media house was "fallacious" but the then finance minister Chidambaram had cleared it.
P Chidambaram had issued a strong statement in response to the FIR, saying that the government was using the CBI and other agencies to target his son.
In May this year, the agency had conducted raids at the premises of Karti, Peter and Indrani Mukerjea at 14 locations in Delhi, Mumbai, and Chennai in connection with the case.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
