In a significant pause to proceedings that have shadowed him for years, Congress MP Karti Chidambaram has secured relief from the Delhi High Court, which ordered a lower court to hold off on hearing charges in two high-profile money laundering cases—one involving an alleged Chinese visa scam, the other tied to the controversial Aircel-Maxis deal.
The High Court, stepping in just days before a scheduled April 15 hearing, said the trial court must wait until at least May 29, when the case will be re-examined. The court noted that continuing with arguments on charges before certain foundational matters are resolved could derail the legal process.
This move came after Chidambaram challenged a March 28 decision that refused to delay the proceedings. He argued that advancing arguments in the money laundering cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) was premature, since the trials for the underlying offences—the so-called “predicate” cases—had yet to even reach the charge stage.
At the heart of the dispute are two cases with strong political undertones. One centers on allegations that, in 2011, visas were improperly issued to 263 Chinese workers while Karti’s father, P. Chidambaram, held the post of Union Home Minister. The other revisits the Aircel-Maxis affair, a 2006 episode involving FIPB clearance for foreign investment during P. Chidambaram’s tenure as Finance Minister.
Karti’s side insists that if he is acquitted in the predicate offences, any talk of laundering money would legally fall apart. “You cannot launder proceeds of a crime that doesn’t exist,” his legal team argued.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED), however, maintained that both cases can proceed on separate tracks. According to them, the money laundering trial need not be shackled to the fate of the underlying offences.
The High Court didn’t buy that—not entirely. It made clear that the foundation of any PMLA case must be rooted in an actual scheduled offence. Without that, the structure collapses. The court observed that if Chidambaram were eventually discharged in the predicate case, continuing with the PMLA trial would defy legal logic.
So for now, the gavel is on pause. The trial court has been told to stand down until the High Court takes its next call.
One court, two cases, and a political legacy tangled in procedural knots—the drama isn’t over, but the stage lights have dimmed for now.
