VVIP Chopper Scam: Delhi High Court Inquires How Christian Michel's Presence Can Be Secured If He Is Released On Bail

Justice Manoj Ohri asked CBI's counsel DP Singh to submit, without prejudice to his arguments on merits, the bail conditions that can be imposed on Michel. The development ensued during hearing of the British national's bail plea.

Opposing the grant of relief, Singh alleged that Michel has attempted to flee to UAE, twice. Further, he submitted,

"We fear that the way British government is helping him and how he has deep inroads, connected right at the top…" he will flee from India.

He also relied on the order passed Justice Mukta Gupta, refusing interim bail to Michel upon a finding that Michel is a flight risk and has no roots in the society.

Singh also produced a translated copy of the Dubai Supreme Court's extradition decree, as directed by the High Court earlier, to demonstrate that Michel is accused of bribery and hence, may be tried under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

He added that though Michel is yet to be charged formally by the trial Court, the supplementary charge sheet mentions the offence of 'Criminal misconduct' under Section 13 of the PC Act, punishable with a term of seven years. Hence, bail should be denied.

Advocate Aljo K. Joseph, representing Michel, vehemently opposed the allegations of non-cooperation in investigation.

He submitted that Michel is ready to participate in the trial and if enlarged on bail, he will abide by the travel restrictions that the Court may in its discretion impose.

He pointed out that all the accused in the case were released on bail within 60 days, however, Michel has been languishing in custody since December 2018.

In order to highlight that there is no prospect of the trial concluding anytime soon, he submitted, that whereas the FIR was registered in 2013, the investigation is yet not complete. Meanwhile, the first charge sheet filed in the year 2017 was of approximately 45,000 pages and the second supplementary chargesheet is of 28000 pages.

Further, more than 280 witnesses and over 1,000 documents are to be examined.

he relied on the case of Lambert Kroger vs Enforcement Directorate, where the High Court had held, "There is no law which authorises or permits discrimination between a foreign national and an Indian national in the matter of granting bail what is permissible is that, considering the facts and circumstances of each case, the Court can impose different conditions to ensure that the accused will be available for facing trial."

So far as the extradition decree is concerned, Joseph urged to differ from the translated copy and sought to produce another translated copy himself.

Though the Bench has permitted the same while also directing Singh to file an affidavit regarding the authenticity of the translation, it noted that the decree produced before it had recorded allegations of "misuse of position', 'offering illegal gratification', 'money laundering', 'fraud', etc.

It thus opined that if the translation is in fact proper, Section 21 of the Extradition Act will not be attracted and Michel can be charged under the PC Act, PMLA and for other offences of fraud, collusion.

However, Joseph argued that the provisions should have been expressly mentioned and under the criminal law, any ambiguity must be read in the favour of accused.

The hearing in case pertaining to CBI has concluded. However, hearing with respect to case registered by the Enforcement Directorate is pending.

The matter is now slated to be heard on January 25.

Case Title: Christian James Michel v. CBI & connected matters.