In a big relief for Former Indian Air Force (IAF) chief SP Tyagi, the Delhi court has been granted bail in relation to the AgustaWestland VVIP chopper deal scam.
The Special CBI court will make a decision on the bail pleas of the other two arrested accused, SP Tyagi’s cousin, Sanjeev Tyagi, and advocate Gautam Khaitan, on January 4. Sanjeev and Gautam will remain in judicial custody until then.
The court put certain conditions on SP Tyagi, including not leaving the country.
ALSO READ: India test fires surface-to-surface nuclear capable ballistic missile ‘Agni-5’
On December 23, the CBI- which is investigating the case- had opposed the bail pleas of the three accused and said if given bail they could tamper with the evidences.
The CBI had informed the court, “The persons are of high ranking… The investigation is going on and we are getting support from other countries. If they get bail, they may influence witnesses, destroy evidences and hamper the ongoing probe which is at a very crucial stage.
ALSO READ: Winter Session in 2016 worst in terms of the level of disruptions
“We have evidences where the meetings unofficially took place for the purpose of crime. At this stage, please do not entertain their bail pleas. Let the probe be completed,” the agency told the court, adding that the matter has “tarnished country’s name.”
On December 21, SP Tyagi’s council, Menaka Guruswamy had informed the court, “All evidences in the nature of bank and account statements, which are documentary have been seized by the CBI. My client’s bank accounts have been frozen by the CBI. He has never evaded summons of the CBI nor has the agency alleged non-cooperation,” she alleged, adding there are no more evidences to be given by SP Tyagi.
She claimed before the court that in the last four years since the FIR was registered, the CBI has never been able to confront Tyagi with any incriminating evidence till date.
ALSO READ: Passenger detained with Rs 4.76 lakh cash in Rs 2K notes in Goa
“Even today, the CBI has not demonstrated anything more than a statement that my client received some cash. He is already retired and not going to influence the probe today and there is no evidence to suggest that he tried to do so in the past,” the counsel said.