New Delhi, 28 April (H.S.): Justice Swarnakanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court has recused herself from hearing Congress MP Karti Chidambaram’s petition seeking to quash a fresh FIR in a corruption‑linked case, opening the way for the matter to be taken up by a different bench. The matter will now be heard by a panel that does not include her; the next date for hearing is scheduled for July.

The recusal came as the case was called up for hearing before her bench. The court observed that Advantage Strategic Consulting Private Limited has also filed a separate petition in the same matter, which is currently being heard by another division bench. To avoid any conflict of interest or perception of bias, Justice Sharma chose to step aside from the proceedings involving Karti Chidambaram’s application to nullify the FIR.

According to the FIR, the liquor‑manufacturing conglomerate Diego Scottland and Sequoia Capital are alleged to have suspiciously routed funds to Advantage Strategic Consulting Private Limited. The Enforcement Directorate is investigating the case and has accused Karti Chidambaram of using his position as an influential public servant to influence authorities on behalf of Diego.

Advantage Strategic Consulting is controlled by Karti Chidambaram and his associate S. Bhaskar Raman. The FIR states that the India Tourism Development Corporation (ITDC) holds exclusive control over duty‑free liquor imports in India and has currently barred Diego Group from such imports. The agency alleges that Diego approached Karti Chidambaram to get the ban lifted and, in return, transferred 15,000 US dollars to Advantage Strategic Consulting. To disguise the transaction, Diego Scottland is said to have entered into a sham agreement with one of Karti’s companies.

The FIR alleges that the money was paid not as genuine consultancy fees, but specifically to exert pressure so that the ban on Diego’s liquor imports would be removed. The provisions invoked include Section 120B (criminal conspiracy), 420 (cheating), and 471 (use of a forged document) of the Indian Penal Code, along with Sections 8, 9, and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Earlier, the Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi granted interim relief to Karti Chidambaram, directing the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to issue him a three‑day prior notice before arresting him in connection with the case. The Delhi High Court’s re‑constitution of the bench marks the next stage in the legal trajectory of this high‑profile corruption‑linked probe.

---------------

Hindusthan Samachar / Jun Sarkar