NEW DELHI: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Thursday got P Chidambaram ’s custody till August 26 to interrogate the former finance minister in the INX Media case, with a special court observing that the “enormity of the alleged money involved in this case and the persons who are accused” required an in-depth investigation.“I am of the view that police custody remand of accused P Chidambaram is justified... It is impressed upon the investigating agency that it will ensure that the personal dignity of the accused is not violated in any manner,” special judge Ajay Kumar Kuhar said after listening to an impassioned plea by Chidambaram that he had cooperated with CBI, as well as arguments of Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta who represented CBI and the former finance minister’s counsel— senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi.The SG had made a strong pitch for a five-day remand of Chidambaram arguing that his interrogation was required to map the money trail in the case concerning allegations of bribery in the sanction of foreign investment proposals when the senior Congress leader, in his role as the then finance minister, headed the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB).“The allegations made against the accused are serious and there cannot be a dispute with the fact that a detailed and in-depth investigation is required,” said the special judge.“The allegations of payment being made to the accused in the years 2007-08 and 2008-09 are specific and categorical. The trail of money, if so paid, is to be ascertained,” the judge observed.After the arguments had concluded, Sibal and Singhvi sought the court’s permission for their client to make a statement. Although SG Mehta raised strong objections, the special judge allowed Chidambaram, who stood in the box, to speak for a minute.Chidambaram rebutted CBI’s charge of non-cooperation with investigation and said the court should call for the transcripts of his interrogation on June 6, 2018 . “Please look at the questions and answers. There are no questions which I haven't answered. The allegation of 5 million (USD) and 4,50,000 (UDS) was never put to me at any time. They asked me if I had a foreign bank account to which I said ‘no’. They asked if my son had a foreign bank account, so I said ‘yes’,” he said.Chidambaram, the first Union finance minister to have been arrested, was brought to the special court on Deen Dayal Upadhyay Marg amid tight security. Though the court’s order marked the second consecutive setback to him, he tried to appear unfazed, flashing even a ‘thumbs up’ sign while being taken back to the CBI headquarters.Responding to the submissions of senior advocates Sibal and Singhvi who strongly argued that Chidambaram’s custodial interrogation was not necessary, judge Kuhar said, “No doubt, it is a case, to a large extent, based on documentary evidence but those documents need to be traced and their value and their worth for the purpose of the investigation in this case is to be ascertained.”Chidambaram’s counsel had said the former FM had not been called for investigation since June 6, 2018 as they pressed for his release on bail. The special judge did not agree. “.... In my view, that cannot be a ground to deny the investigating agencies an opportunity to conduct an effective investigation now.”Sibal and Singhvi argued that police remand is an exception and not a rule. However, the special judge had a different take. “The investigation needs to be brought to a logical end and, for that purpose, custodial interrogation is sometimes found useful and fruitful.”Chidambaram was accused of receiving around $5.5 million as kickbacks in 2007-2008 and 2008-2009. Appearing for CBI, SG Mehta argued that Chidambaram had refused to cooperate and failed to produce documents he had promised in June 2018.The SG cited the Delhi high court’s judgment on Tuesday rejecting Chidambaram's pre-arrest bail to contend that the "nature" and "gravity" of the offence was established . He further said the former finance minister had "effective and informed" role in the conspiracy, so five days’ custody was necessary to establish the money trail.Sibal and Singhvi contested the CBI claims arguing that no action had been taken against the six secretary-rank officers who were part of FIPB. One of them, D Subbarao, went on to become the governor of Reserve Bank of India, said the two defence counsel. Calling it a case of documentary evidence, the senior lawyers said their client could not be expected to give replies to suit the whims of the investigating agency.The lawyers also drew on the point of parity by saying that Chidambaram’s son Karti, who is an accused in the case, was already on bail, while another person S Bhaskararaman was given anticipatory bail. Besides, they submitted that Indrani and Peter Mukerjea of INX Media, two other accused in the case, were on default bail.CBI has alleged that Chidambaram’s son Karti exerted influence on FIPB owing to his relationship with his father to prevent punitive action against M/s INX Media Pvt Ltd which had violated the foreign exchange guidelines related to foreign direct investment . In lieu of the favour, a substantial amount was paid to the companies in which Karti had sustainable interest, directly or indirectly, the investigating agency has alleged.