New Delhi: A special CBI Court on Thursday allowed Indrani Mukerjea’s application seeking to become an approver in connection with INX Media case, stated news agency ANI. The court which had deferred her application for 12 noon in the day had fixed the next date of hearing in the case for July 11.Also Read - Over 35 Inmates Including Indrani Mukerjea Test Positive for COVID-19 at Mumbai's Byculla Jail

Meanwhile, Indrani will be produced by Byculla jail authorities in the court that day. 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. Also Read - Sheena Bora Case: Indrani Mukerjea's Bail Plea Rejected by Special CBI Court in Mumbai

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. Also Read - INX Media Case: 'Indrani Claimed to Have Paid $5 Million to P Chidambaram, His Son Karti,' Says CBI in Fresh Chargesheet

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)