AgustaWestland Case: Supreme Court Dismisses Gautam Khaitan’s Plea Against ED Attachment

The Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi declined to examine the validity of the attachment proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), noting that the legality of Section 44(1)(c) of the statute is already under consideration in pending review petitions arising from the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary judgment.

“Since the issue of the applicability of the provisions of the PMLA is under consideration in review petitions in the Vijay Madanlal case, it seems to us that the legality of Section 44(1)(c) shall be examined in the course of those proceedings,” the CJI observed.

The Bench said there was no reason to entertain a separate writ petition on the same issue and dismissed Khaitan’s plea, while keeping the question of law open.

Khaitan had approached the Supreme Court after the Delhi High Court rejected his challenge to the ED’s provisional attachment of assets allegedly linked to proceeds of crime in the AgustaWestland case, which pertains to alleged kickbacks in the purchase of VVIP helicopters.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for Khaitan, urged the Court to at least grant liberty to intervene in the Vijay Madanlal review proceedings if Section 44(1)(c) is argued in detail.

Responding sharply, the Chief Justice remarked that such practices must stop. “These rich applicants think they can bypass any trial. You should face trial like any ordinary person,” the CJI said, underscoring that the criminal process cannot be short-circuited through repeated constitutional challenges.

The Bench clarified that any liberty granted would be to counsel and not to the petitioner himself. “Liberty is granted to Mr Luthra, not the petitioner,” the CJI said, indicating that appropriate applications could be moved in the pending review matters.

The CJI also noted the presence of Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal in court and expressed hope that the review petitions relating to the Vijay Madanlal judgment would begin substantive hearing soon. “Let’s hope that by the end of the month we start,” he said.

The Vijay Madanlal Choudhary judgment, delivered in 2022, upheld key provisions of the PMLA, including the ED’s powers of arrest, attachment, and the stringent bail conditions. Several review petitions challenging aspects of that ruling are currently pending before the Supreme Court.

Previosuly, in 2023, a Delhi Court had granted permission to Advocate Gautam Khaitan to travel abroad for four months. Special Judge Arvind Kumar of the Rouse Avenue Court had directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to suspend the Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against Khaitan during the same period. The Court was hearing an application filed by Khaitan seeking permission to visit Kazakhstan, Russia, Japan, Thailand, Indonesia, the UAE, the UK, Schengen countries except for Italy and Switzerland, Turkey, the US, Ghana, Tanzania, China, Hong Kong, South Africa, Australia, Maldives, and Saudi Arabia to redevelop relations and meet local law firms to revive business for his law firm O.P. Khaitan & Company.