NEW DELHI: The CBI informed the Supreme Court on Friday that former finance minister P Chidambaram’s son Karti, contrary to his claim that he had only one foreign bank account, had several such accounts which he tried to close during his last visit to the UK. He also shifted money to another foreign account.

“CBI had asked him about his foreign bank accounts. He’d replied that he had only one. But probe by the Financial Intelligence Unit revealed Karti, during his visit abroad, had closed five or six foreign bank accounts after transferring the monies,” additional solicitor general Tushar Mehta told a bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice A M Khanwilkar and Justice D Y Chandrachud. Waving sealed envelopes purportedly containing details of Karti’s activities in the UK in June, Mehta added, “The documents we received a few days back during investigation makes it clear what happened during Karti Chidambaram’s last visit abroad. These documents reveal shocking facts.”

Reports about Foreign bank accounts

However, his attempt to submit the investigation report to the judges obstructed by Karti’s counsel Kapil Sibal, who said the CBI could not pass on evidence unrelated to the issue heard — validity of the lookout notice which debarred his client from going abroad.

“Are these purported evidence part of any investigation conducted pursuant to any FIR? The answer is clearly ‘no’. Karti is ready to face prosecution if the CBI lodges an FIR and submits the so-called evidence purportedly put inside these sealed envelopes. Otherwise, it is just vindictiveness to harass Karti aiming indirectly to trouble his father, mother and wife,” Sibal said, as he successfully thwarted the agency’s attempt to submit the envelope.

This drew sharp reaction from Mehta, who said, “Probably, he knows what I’m going to hand over to the court. He does not want the court to peruse these documents.”

Sibal said Karti was not asked a single question about foreign bank accounts during his questioning by the CBI following the SC direction to his client to appear before the agency. “The entire argument of the CBI was that the lookout notice issued because of irregular FIPB clearance to downstream investment of Rs 300 crore by INX Media. How does the sealed cover evidence relate to this case?” he asked.