[ad_1]
A Delhi court Saturday said it was satisfied with the explanation that businessman Robert Vadra, husband of Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi, did not intentionally omit details pertaining to his medical emergency stop in Dubai, and issued a warning to be careful in the future.
On September 20, the court refused to accept an explanation offered by Vadra — that he stayed in Dubai for a medical emergency in August this year — and issued a showcause notice asking him why his fixed deposit (FD) submitted with the court should not be forfeited.
On Saturday, Special Judge Neelofer Abida Perveen observed: “From the contents of the affidavit, I am satisfied that the omission is not intentional, the explanation is not an afterthought, and conduct of the applicant does not lack in bona fides and good faith.”
“The applicant has tendered unqualified and unconditional apology for the lapse which is accepted in the circumstances as noted above. However the applicant is warned to remain careful in future. The show cause notice stands accordingly discharged,” the court said.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED), represented by Special Public Prosecutor NK Matta, had alleged that “the violation is deliberate and intentional and that the applicant has tried to circumvent the order of the Court”.
Vadra’s lawyers had submitted that a mistake had occurred since an amended application seeking permission to stay over at Dubai for four days, during the trip to the UK, had not been filed.
The lawyers submitted that they “deeply regretted that out of inadvertence the same was not filed, however the conduct of the applicant throughout has been nothing less than bonafide”.
Vadra’s lawyers had argued that the court had in the past granted Vadra permission to travel to Dubai on three separate occasions.
“That there had been no objection to the applicant’s travel to Dubai, or stop over at Dubai on such previous occasions. That this buffer of a brief stay in Dubai was necessitated in the wake of the sudden medical emergency and that the itinerary and travel tickets were duly filed disclosing the break in journey,” his lawyers argued.
They told the court that a “purely bonafide mistake has occurred, and for the same the applicant has also tendered unconditional and unequivocal apology.”
[ad_2]
Source link