VVIP chopper case: ED calls Michel’s plea for release misleading

THe Enforcement board of directors on tues told a new delhi margaret court that the plea to be released by the alleged middleman in the AgustaWestland VVIP pearly scam, Christian Michel James,was misleading as he had not completed the maximum sentence of seven years in the money laundering case for which he was extradited from the UAE.The federal agency, through a two-page written note, submitted before special judge Sanjay Jindal.James, through his lawyer Aljo K Joseph, has sought his release from prison, on the grounds that he had already undergone the period of maximum sentence prescribed for the offences for which he was extradited to India from United Arab Emirates, as a result of which he was entitled to be released by virtue of the provision of section 436A of CrPc.The provision deals with the maximum period for which an undertrial prisoner can be detained, stating that if an undertrial prisoner has been detained for a period extending up to one-half of the maximum imprisonment period specified for an offence, they should be released on their personal bond, potentially with or without sureties.The ED stated, “…Article 17 of the Extradition Treaty with UAE not only permits trial for offences in respect of which extradition of an accused person is sought, but also for the offences connected herewith…reading of the extradition request as noted in the 2018 judgement passed by the Dubai Supreme Court, would show that besides other offences, the applicant’s extradition was also ‘sought’ in respect of the offence of money laundering”.Stating that under section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the maximum sentence prescribed for the concerned scheduled offences is seven years and the date of arrest in the ED’s case was December 22, 2018, the maximum period of imprisonment for the offence has not yet expired and therefore the present entitlement sought by James were premature and liable to be dismissed.The ED’s submissions on Tuesday came a day after the CBI, through public prosecutor DP Singh, argued on Monday that while the maximum sentence in it’s case was complete, framing of charges has to be carried out and Michel has to plead guilty, only after which he can claim that his sentence was over in the CBI’s case. Michel was arrested by the CBI first after his extradition, on December 4, 2018.Michel is accused of being a middleman in the AgustaWestland deal and faces charges under Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.CBI had alleged that senior officials in PMO, SPG, and Air Force agreed in 2004 to tweak the mandatory service ceiling of helicopters to favour AgustaWestland. This allegedly caused a loss of €398.21 million (approx. ₹2,666 crore) to the government in a deal worth €556.262 million ( ₹3,726.9 crore). The ED is probing the money trail linked to kickbacks in the deal.Michel was extradited from the UAE in December 2018 and remained in custody until he was granted bail this year. The Delhi high court granted him bail in March in ED’s money laundering probe, following a Supreme Court order in February that granted bail in the CBI’s corruption case. While doing so, the apex court observed that CBI had not completed the trial despite filing two chargesheets, and key documents had yet to be shared with Michel.He was released after furnishing a personal bond of ₹5 lakh and one surety of the same amount, as directed by the Delhi high court. He, however, still remains in prison, awaiting the renewal of his passport, which he has to submit before the court as part of the bail conditions.The Delhi high court had in May, modified James’s bail conditions and replaced an earlier requirement of surety bond with a personal bond of ₹5 lakhs and a cash surety of ₹10 lakhs. It also directed that Michel would not be required to submit his passport right away and directed the Foreign Regional Registration Office (FRRO) to ensure he does not leave the country and instructed the British High Commission to submit his renewed passport directly to the trial court.Michel had earlier told the trial court that Delhi was like a “larger prison” for him, as his family could not visit, and that he feared for his life outside jail.