Murali Krishnan Profile picture
Nov 27, 2019 17 tweets 6 min read Read on X
#INXMedia: Kapil Sibal begins arguments in bail plea by P Chidambaram in Supreme Court. @htTweets
#INXMedia: Sibal narrating the facts of the case.
#INXMedia: ED said in their remand application that I (P Chidambaram) was trying to influence witnesses. I was in their custody. So their allegation is I was trying to influence witnesses from ED office when I did not even have a phone, argues Kapil Sibal.
#INXMedia: The HC rejected all the three arguments of ED - likelihood of tampering with evidence, flight risk and influencing witnesses.

Yet, the HC rejected bail on the ground that offence is of serious nature, submits Sibal.
#INXMedia: There is no document connecting me to the case. All the other accused are out on bail or have not been arrested. Yet, I am the kingpin, argues Sibal.
#INXMedia: According to them, corrutpion money of Rs. 10 lakh was allegedly paid to Karti Chidambaram and since I am father of Karti Chidambaram, I am the kingpin.
#INXMedia: They have not interrogated me all this while. Chidambaram has not been confronted with any witness, says. Sibal.
#INXMedia: They have not interrogated me yet. Petitioner has not been confronted with any witness, says Sibal.
#INXMedia: All this is done to keep me in jail, says Chidambaram.
#INXMedia: It is as if I am some Ranga Billa. If I am not released on bail, it will send a wrong message to this country, Sibal argues for P Chidambaram.
#INXMedia: Unlike in offences like murder where we know that the offence has been committed, in this case we dont even know if there is an offence which has been committed or not. The offence is yet to be established, Sibal.
#INXMedia: Gravity of offence cannot be ground to deny bail. Offence itself is not established.

Far from gravity of offence, there is not even an offence, Sibal.
#INXMedia: Their argument is there is a beneficiary company, Karti is the owner of that company and I am Karti's father.

No other evidence connecting me to the crime, Sibal.
#INXMedia: If their argument of gravity of offence is accepted, then I will never get bail, submits Sibal.
#INXMedia: Sibal concludes his arguments. Sr. Adv. AM Singhvi begins. Bench rises for lunch.
#INXMediaCase: Unless there are extraordinary circumstances, bail cannot be denied on the ground of gravity of offence.

Such an extraordinary case could be when accused is a habitual offender, a terrorist or a child molester and not a case like this, Singhvi argues.
#INXMediacase: Singhvi concludes arguments on behalf of P Chidambaram in bail plea; ED will advance its arguments tomorrow.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Murali Krishnan

Murali Krishnan Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @legaljournalist

May 17, 2021
A late night sitting by Kolkata High Court to cancel interim bail granted to two sitting State ministers, one MLA and one former Mayor.
Calcutta* High Court not Kolkata. The chartered High Court legacy.
More interesting news. This was not an appeal against the lower court order but a plea for transfer of trial under Section 407 CrPC.
Read 6 tweets
Sep 21, 2020
Sudarshan News and media regulation: Hearing commences before Supreme Court.

Centre has filed a fresh affidavit calling for regulation of digital media before the court takes up issue of regulation of TV channels.
Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi is appearing on behalf News Broadcasters Federation which has sought impleadment in the matter.
Rohatgi says NBF is the largest body of tv channels in India with 160 members from different parts of the country.

He submits News Broadcasters Association is not representative of news channels and seeks permission to file an affidavit to put forth a self-regulatory mechanism.
Read 18 tweets
Sep 18, 2020
Hearing against Sudarshan News commences before the Supreme Court.
Sanjay Hegde enters appearance on behalf of Zakaf Foundation of India.

"I have a watching brief in this matter. We are not a party to this matter," says Hegde.
Justice DY Chandrachud tells Hegde that Sudarshan News has raised substantial issues against Zakaf Foundation.

"But we are not here to investigate into your client. But Sudarshan News has sought to justify their programme on the grounds of your source of funding"
Read 42 tweets
Sep 17, 2020
Sudarshan News and UPSC Jihad: Hearing commences before Supreme Court.
Sr. Counsel Anoop Chaudhuri appearing for petitioner says Sudarshan news has filed an affidavit with vague allegations and submits he wants to file a rejoinder.
Shyam Divan says it was difficult to file a detailed affidavit in two days. We (lawyers) are all in different locations.
We were ambushed by various applications/ interventions, he submits.
Read 4 tweets
Sep 17, 2020
Sudarshan News files affidavit before Supreme court defending its programme Bindas Bol and the use of the term "UPSC Jehad".

The affidavit largely focuses on foreign funding received by Zakat Foundation, an orgnisation which supports civil service aspirants.
Sudarshan News has claimed that some such funds received by Zakat Foundation are from terror-linked organisations.

The organisations/ individuals named in the affidavit are Madina Trust, Muslim Aid (UK), Zakat Foundation of America and Zakir Naik
The affidavit says the TV channel has no ill-will against any particular community or individual and do not oppose selection of any meritorious candidate

"There is no statement or message in the four episodes broadcast thatmembers of a particular community should not join UPSC"
Read 8 tweets
Sep 15, 2020
Supreme Court raises grave concerns about the manner in which debates are conducted by certain television channels.

Justice KM Joseph says many times panellists are not allowed to speak and anchor takes up most of the time and panellists are also half-muted.
Supreme Court berates Sudarshan news.

Here is one anchor who says one particular community is trying to gain access to UPSC. Can anything be more insidious than such claims. Such allegations affect stability of country and also casts aspersions on credibility of exam.
In the UPSC exam, all are subject to same tests, interviews and are assessed by same persons. But the insinuation is one community is trying to infiltrate the UPSC. Can such allegations without factual basis be allowed, asks Justice DY Chandrachud?
Read 15 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(