Premium
This is an archive article published on September 19, 2024

AgustaWestland case: Delhi High Court says ‘insufficient’ reasons to refuse bail to alleged middleman Christian Michel James

Christian Michel James also faces an FIR by CBI, filed on March 14, 2013, in the AgustaWestland choppers case.

delhi high courtJustice Dinesh Kumar Sharma was hearing James's bail plea against the ED complaint lodged against him on July 3, 2014. James was booked under Sections 7, 8, 9, 12 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday orally remarked that there were “insufficient” reasons to refuse bail to Christian Michel James, accused of being an alleged middleman in the Rs 3,600-crore AgustaWestland case relating to the purchase of 12 VVIP helicopters.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma was hearing James’s bail plea against the ED complaint lodged against him on July 3, 2014. James was booked under Sections 7, 8, 9, 12 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Considering that James has been in judicial custody for fewer than six years, Justice Sharma orally remarked, “How can I write that this court does not grant bail?”

The maximum punishment possible in the ED complaint in case of a conviction, is seven years. ED filed its chargesheet in June 2016, alleging that James received 30 million Euros (approximately Rs 225 crore) from AgustaWestland.

James is also facing an FIR by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), filed on March 14, 2013, and the court is due to hear it on September 25. He has moved two bail pleas, one against the ED complaint and the other against the CBI FIR.

Advocate Aljo K Joseph, representing James, submitted before the court on Wednesday that James has already completed the required punishment and has been in custody since December 2018 after being extradited from Dubai. Opposing James’ bail plea, ED, through Special Public Prosecutor Zoheb Hossain submitted that he is a flight risk and pointed out that the Supreme Court refused to entertain his application.

Justice Sharma, however, remarked that the issue of flight risk can be remedied by imposing a condition to mark attendance every week.

Story continues below this ad

In March this year, James moved a bail petition before the Supreme Court under Article 32 and while rejecting his plea, the top court reserved his liberty to approach the trial court for bail. On March 11, 2022, the Delhi High Court rejected his bail pleas in the ED and CBI cases.

The bail pleas were earlier listed for final hearing by a previous single-judge bench of Justice Jyoti Singh for July 10 and are now before Justice Sharma.

Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court Professional Profile Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express. Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare). Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others. She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020. With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025) Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles: High-Profile Case Coverage She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots. She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy. Signature Style Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system. X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments