The agency had called Karti for questioning today in connection with the foreign investment clearance given in 2006 in the Aircel Maxis deal when his father P Chidambaram was the Finance Minister.
Karti, through his lawyer, has refused to appear before the agency saying a special court had discharged "all the accused" in the matter.
"All proceedings connected with the said (case)... Were also terminated," the response said.
The response said after the discharge of the accused and "termination" of the proceedings, the CBI will not have jurisdiction to issue a summons in connection with the case.
The CBI strongly contradicted claims of Karti saying only four, including two companies, of the eight charge sheeted accused were discharged by the special court and the agency has already filed an appeal against the order in the Delhi High Court in May this year.
He said two Malaysian nationals and two Malaysian companies who were charge sheeted by the CBI in the matter did not appear before the special court and warrants were issued against the individuals.
"Court proceedings are still pending. Request has been placed before the Interpol for issuance of Red Notices against the two Malaysian national," Dayal said.
The CBI sources said all the options are open before them in the matter. They said that examination also gives suspects a chance to put forth their case before the agency.
They said the agency is also looking into investments made by firms controlled by Karti Chidambaram into Aircel while the FIPB clearance issue was under the consideration of the Finance Ministry.
In August 2014, the CBI had charge sheeted former Telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran, his brother Kalanithi, Malaysian business tycoon T Ananda Krishnan, Malaysian national Ralph Marshall and four firms-- Sun Direct TV Pvt Ltd, South Asia Entertainment Holding Ltd, Maxis Communication Berhad and ASTRO All Asia Network PLC.
The court order, however, did not have any effect on the two accused Malaysian nationals--Ralph Marshall and T Ananda Krishnan--in the CBI's case as the court has already segregated the proceedings against them from that of Maran brothers and others. Both had not appeared before the court.
The CBI had challenged the order of discharge in the Delhi High Court on May 11 this year.
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
