Karti Chidambaram moves Delhi HC seeking bail

Karti Chidambaram, the arrested son of former Union minister P Chidambaram, today moved the Delhi High Court seeking bail, hours after a court sent him to judicial custody till March 24.
A bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar said the matter would be heard tomorrow by an appropriate bench after the counsel for Karti, senior advocate Dayan Krishnan, moved the court seeking bail.
A special court had earlier in the day sent Karti to judicial custody in the INX Media corruption case and dismissed his plea that he be put in a separate cell in Tihar Jail in view of a threat perception.

The court also dismissed his appeal for an urgent hearing on his bail plea and the threat perception due to the fact that his father, as a Union minister in the previous UPA government, had handled several sensitive issues.
Karti was produced before the trial court on the expiry of his three-day police remand. The court sent him to Tihar Jail after the CBI, in whose custody he was quizzed for 12 days in a row after his arrest on February 28 from Chennai, said he was no longer required for further custodial interrogation.
The court said his bail plea would be heard on March 15 as scheduled.

Karti was arrested on his return from the United Kingdom in connection with an FIR lodged on May 15 last year. It alleged irregularities in a Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance given to a media house, INX Media, for receiving funds of about Rs 305 crore from overseas in 2007 when his father was the Union finance minister.
The CBI had initially alleged that Karti Chidambaram received Rs 10 lakh as a bribe for facilitating the FIPB clearance to INX Media. It, however, later revised the figure to USD 1 million (about Rs 6.50 crore at the current exchange rate and Rs 4.50 crore in 2007).

The fresh evidence in the case, which triggered Karti's arrest, was based on a statement of Indrani Mukerjea, former director of INX Media (P) Ltd, who recorded it under Section 164 of the CrPC before a magistrate on February 17.