<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Former Air Chief Marshall SP Tyagi will be spending Christmas behind bars as the court’s decision on his jail application maybe announced on Monday. Two days after the defence concluded their arguments, CBI submitted their opposition in front of Special CBI Judge Arvind Kumar at Patiala house court on Friday.Special CBI Judge Arvind Kumar reserved its order on the bail applications of Tyagi, his cousin Sanjeev aka Julie and Delhi-based lawyer Gautam Khaitan who were arrested on December 9 in the case pertaining to the AgustaWestland chopper scam.Refuting the charge that the CBI had arbitrarily arrested SP Tyagi and thereby tarnishing his image, Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta representing the CBI, stressed that not much could be revealed at this delicate stage since the investigation was multi-layered, and multi-jurisdictional. “We have evidences where the meetings unofficially took place for the purpose of crime. Let the probe be completed,” Mehta said, seeking the dismissal of all three bail pleas.The CBI submitted a case diary that contained evidence collected through oral and documentary material. “This evidence is not to be disclosed in the pre-chargesheet stage,” Mehta stressed throughout his submission. Mehta stated that the evidence gathered took time since Letters of Rogatory (LORs) were sent to eight countries through official channels and the process was time consuming. Mehta said that in 2014 Italy, one of the countries approached, sent 1.2 lakh documents of which 70 per cent was in Italian. Mauritius, Mehta added sent evidence in 2016.”We cannot reveal many facts as it will have serious implication on the case,” Mehta said. “During investigation the accused came to know the line of questioning when he was interrogated. Hence, the moment the accused comes out, there is a concern that other witnesses who have not yet been interrogated will be influenced and perhaps evidence maybe destroyed,” Mehta added.Mehta submitted that during their investigation not only Tyagi, but his family members also figured as prospective witnesses. “SP Tyagi and his cousin’s name have cropped up often during the investigation,” Mehta said. Replying to the court’s query whether the former air chief had received any money – the sole charge against him in the FIR, the CBI stated that SP Tyagi had bought several properties while he was still in office which he did not declare as he was supposed to.In the hour-long submission, the CBI touched upon many points – a few to strengthen their case against the three accused, and others to rebut the argument made by the defence.Clarifying that the Italian Surpeme Court had set aside the order of the appellate court and not the trial court, in the case pertaining to Giuseppe Orsi and Bruno Spagnolini, former CEOs of Finmeccanica and AgustaWestland. Whereas, Italian national and middle-man Guido Haschke had never contested his guilt and continued to be a convict. “The decision of the Italian courts is not the foundation of my case, though it may simply work as a guide to my investigation,” Mehta said.Opposing CBI’s contention, Meneka Guruswamy, representing the former air chief, said his client “could not be deprived from freedom if the investigation is taking time to complete”. Guruswamy claimed that the CBI had already seized all the documents since the FIR was registered. “The CBI’s case is simply this, I will not tell you the case, I will not tell you the evidence and I will not allow you a defence,” Guruswamy argued. “Self-incrimination does not amount to non-cooperation,” she added.”Even today, the CBI has not demonstrated anything more than a statement that my client received some cash,”the defence said.