Mir went on to submit that the reasons for according sanction under Section 40 of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) to take action against Patel were confabulated.
“On merits, no reasons (for opening of LOC) were supplied…Finding no reasons were recorded, came an order (by ACMM).”
He pointed out that the CBI, in its reply filed before Court, stated that Patel was well-connected outside India and thus could not be allowed to leave the country.
“With such usage of language, you had to have material to show I had previously made attempts to flee India,” he said.
Further, from the case diary of the CBI, there was nothing to show that Patel was a flight risk, Mir argued.
Source: Barandbench
