NDLI: P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Bail s.439 Grant of in economic offence cR.p.c
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.439 – Bail – Grant of, in economic offence – In the instant case, CBI registered a case of corruption against some known and unknown suspects including the son of the appellant – Appellant was the then Union Finance Minister – He was however not named in the said FIR – Based on the said FIR, respondent directorate registered ECIR case for money laundering against the accused named in the FIR – Allegations in the said ECIR case were the same as those in the FIR – Appellant was not named in this case as well – Apprehending his arrest, appellant applied for anticipatory bail which was rejected – Appellant was arrested in CBI case and since then he had been in custody – In ECIR case, appellant was arrested on the grounds that payment of Rs.3 crores was made at the appellant’s instance to the companies controlled by his son on account of FIPB work done for INX Group and that due to non-co-operation of appellant, investigation was not fruitful and certain relevant information which was within his exclusive knowledge was withheld by him and thus his custodial investigation was necessary – After his arrest, appellant moved a regular bail application before High Court – By impugned order, High Court held test of flight risk, tampering of evidence and influencing of the witnesses in favour of appellant, however declined the bail on the ground that prima facie the allegations were serious in nature and the appellant played key and active role in the case – On appeal, held: Appellant was declined anticipatory bail earlier and was available for custodial interrogation for more than 45 days – In addition to the custodial interrogation, in case further investigation is made, the appellant would be bound to participate in such investigation as is required by the respondent – Further one of the co-accused has been granted bail by the High Court while the other co-accused is enjoying interim protection from arrest – Appellant is aged about 74 years and as noted by the High Court itself in its order, the appellant has already suffered two bouts of illness during incarceration and was put on antibiotics and advised to take steroids of maximum strength – In that circumstance, the availability of the appellant for further investigation, interrogation and facing trial is not jeopardized – In view of all facts and circumstances, the appellant is granted bail. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.439 – Bail – Consideration of bail application in economic offence – Held: Even economic offences fall under the category of “grave offence”, in view of the consequences that would befall on the society in cases of financial irregularities, and in such circumstance while considering the application for bail in such matters, the Court has to deal with the same, being sensitive to the nature of allegation made against the accused – One of the circumstances to consider the gravity of the offence is the term of sentence that is prescribed for the offence the accused is alleged to have committed – Such consideration with regard to the gravity of offence is a factor which is in addition to the triple test or the tripod test that would be normally applied – However, it is not a rule that bail should be denied in every case of economic offence since there is no such bar created in the relevant enactment passed by the legislature nor does the bail jurisprudence provides so – The consideration will have to be on case to case basis on the facts involved therein and securing the presence of the accused to stand trial.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajjikuttira Somaiah Bopanna
Neutral Citation	2019 INSC 1317
Petitioner	P. Chidambaram
Respondent	Directorate Of Enforcement
SCR	[2019] 14 S.C.R. 450
Judgement Date	2019-12-04
Case Number	1831

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement

Please Log-in to view this content

Anwari Begum Vs. Sher Mohammad and Anr.

Bharatbhai Bhimabhai Bharwad Vs. State of Gujarat and Others

Rohit Tandon Vs. The Enforcement Directorate

Mauji Ram Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.

Mahipal Vs. Rajesh Kumar @ Polia & Anr.

Gobarbhai Naranbhai Singala Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.

M. Ravindran Vs. The Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Preet Pal Singh Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.

P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement

P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement

P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Anwari Begum Vs. Sher Mohammad and Anr.

Bharatbhai Bhimabhai Bharwad Vs. State of Gujarat and Others

Rohit Tandon Vs. The Enforcement Directorate

Mauji Ram Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.

Mahipal Vs. Rajesh Kumar @ Polia & Anr.

Gobarbhai Naranbhai Singala Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.

M. Ravindran Vs. The Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Preet Pal Singh Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.

P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement

P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement