ED Opposes Christian James Michel’s Plea to Modify Bail Conditions Before Delhi HC
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) opposed the plea filed by Christian James Michel before the Delhi High Court, wherein he sought modification of certain conditions imposed in his bail order. Michel, an accused in the AgustaWestland VVIP Chopper Scam, approached the court seeking relaxation, particularly concerning the requirement of furnishing an Indian surety.
The bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma reserved the order after recording the submissions of both parties.
The ED argued that similar conditions were imposed in another bail order passed in the CBI case against Michel and that the request for modification was legally unfounded. The agency further submitted that Michel’s plea implicitly acknowledged the jurisdiction and custody of Indian authorities, which was inconsistent with his earlier arguments.
Advocate Aljo K. Joseph, appearing for Michel, submitted that his client had already undergone six years and nine months of imprisonment, with over four months in custody in Dubai. He argued that these circumstances should be considered while relaxing the bail conditions.
Special Counsel Zoheb Hussain, appearing for ED, opposed the plea by drawing attention to a previous bail order dated March 7, 2025, in the CBI case involving identical conditions. He noted that Michel had not previously sought relaxation of these conditions in the CBI matter. Specifically addressing the requirement of furnishing an Indian surety, Hussain submitted that, as per prevailing case law, a surety from abroad was permissible and a local surety was not mandatory.
Special Counsel Zoheb Hussain further argued that when courts relax the condition of local surety, they ensure other safeguards, such as security and personal bonds, are in place. Emphasizing Michel's acceptance of the court’s jurisdiction, Special Counsel Hussain pointed out that once a bail order was issued, the custody in India was recognized as valid. Therefore, Michel’s request to modify the bail conditions, in itself, indicated his acknowledgment of being under the custody of Indian authorities.
In the previous court hearing, Advocate Aljo K. Joseph submitted that his client was unable to fulfil the bail condition related to furnishing an Indian surety, citing the absence of friends or family in India. Advocate Joseph argued that it was practically impossible for James to secure an Indian surety, as no one was willing to provide one.
Background:
The case originated from a disclosure by the then Head of External Relations of M/s Finmeccanica, the parent company of M/s AgustaWestland International Ltd. (AWIL). Based on this, Italian authorities initiated an investigation in 2011 into alleged bribe payments through middlemen, including Guido Ralph Haschke and the applicant, Christian James Michel, concerning AWIL’s supply of 12 VVIP helicopters to India. Surveillance by Italian prosecutors revealed that AWIL had disguised bribes as engineering payments.
In February 2013, India’s Ministry of Defence filed a complaint with the CBI, leading to an FIR under IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act provisions. The investigation revealed that the original 6000-meter altitude requirement in 2002 had been lowered to 4500 meters after Air Chief Marshal S.P. Tyagi took over, making AWIL eligible. AWIL won the contract in 2010, but bribery allegations led to its cancellation in 2014.
James was accused of laundering money through his firms, receiving Euro 42 million as kickbacks. Following extradition from the UAE in 2018, he was arrested and faced multiple prosecution complaints.
In the bail application dated March 4, 2025, Advocate Aljo K. Joseph contended that James had already undergone over six years of incarceration, nearing the maximum seven-year sentence under the PMLA, without conviction. Advocate Joseph argued that the prolonged detention without trial violated his right to a fair trial under Article 21.
However, the ED argued that James posed a flight risk, as he repeatedly evaded investigation and failed to cooperate with authorities. It was argued that James fled India after the AgustaWestland investigation surfaced and obstructed inquiries even after his arrest.
The Delhi High Court, after taking into consideration the prolonged incarceration as well as the Supreme Court's Judgment on the issue, granted bail to James.
For Applicant: Advocate Aljo K. Joseph
For ED: Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain with Advocates Vivek Gurnani, Kartik Sabharwal and Harshit Kiran
Case Title: Christian Michel James v ED