New Delhi: Indrani Mukherjea’s on Thursday appeared before a special court in Delhi in connection with the INX media case. Also Read - Supreme Court Allows Karti Chidambaram to Travel Abroad But He Has To Pay Rs 2 Crore
Indrani said that she will record her statement truthfully with all facts before the court in the case, news agency ANI stated. Also Read - INX Media Case: Supreme Court Rejects CBI’s Review Plea Challenging Bail Order to P Chidambaram
Earlier this month, a special CBI Court allowed Indrani Mukerjea’s application seeking to become an approver in connection with the case. Also Read - INX Media Money-Laundering Case: ED Files Chargesheet Against Congress Leader P Chidambaram, Son Karti
Last year, Indrani had filed a plea seeking to become an approver in the INX Media case. She is currently lodged in the Byculla jail in Mumbai in connection with the murder case of her daughter Sheena Bora. On May 15, 2017, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had registered an FIR in the case alleging irregularities in the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance granted to the INX Media for receiving overseas funds to the tune of Rs 305 crore in 2007, during P Chidambaram’s tenure as finance minister.
Besides Indrani Mukherjea and her husband Peter Mukerjea, the CBI had registered an FIR against Chidambaram‘s son Karti and his company Chess Management Services and Padma Vishwanathan and his company Advantage Strategic Consulting Services. Notably, the INX Media was once owned by Peter and Indrani Mukherjea, who are the prime suspects in this money laundering and corruption case.
Investigating agencies state that INX Media showed a transaction of Rs 10 lakh named against Advantage Strategic Consulting Pvt Ltd, a firm which is allegedly indirectly owned by Chidambaram’s son Karti, as management consultancy charges towards an FIPB notification and clarification.
Reports allege that Karti Chidambaram took money from INX Media and used his influence and power to manipulate a tax probe against the company regarding a case of violation of the FIPB conditions to get investments from Mauritius.
(WIth agency inputs)