The error was in four paragraphs of the 41-page judgment given by Justice Kait.
The judge also referred to a 2017 high court order in the Tandon versus ED case in which it was observed that "there is a provision of trial by special courts in case of 'schedule offences' under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Possibility of a joint trial would arise under Section 44 of the PMLA only when a charge sheet is filed upon completion of investigation and the case is committed to a special court.
The ED, in its plea filed through the central government's standing counsel Amit Mahajan and advocate Rabat Nair, sought correction of the errors which "inadvertently and due to accidental slip have crept in paragraphs 35, 36, 39 and 40 of the order."
"It appears that the factual assertions which have been attributed to the respondent ED as part of its submissions, forms part of one of the judgments which was relied by it during the course of arguments.
"Inadvertently, it appears that the said factual portion of the judgment relied by the ED instead of being quoted or summarised as the part of the relied upon judgments, have been inadvertently/ accidently referred to in the order dated November 15 as the factual submissions made by the ED," the application said.
The ED clarified that it has not placed those facts as part of its submission in support of the argument for rejection of bail to Chidambaram.
It said the facts of Tandon's case are neither a part of the investigation papers of Chidambaram's case nor were remotely relatable to the probe undertaken by the ED in this case.
Tandon, who was arrested in 2016, is an accused in the demonetisation-related money laundering case.
The senior Congress leader moved the Supreme Court on Monday challenging the Delhi High Court's Friday order denying him bail in the money laundering case.
In the INX Media money-laundering case, the ED had arrested 74-year-old Chidambaram on October 16.
He was arrested by the CBI on August 21 in the INX Media corruption case and was granted bail by the Supreme Court in the CBI case on October 22.
The case was registered by the CBI on May 15, 2017, alleging irregularities in a Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance granted to the INX Media group for receiving overseas funds of Rs 305 crore in 2007, during Chidambaram's tenure as finance minister.
Thereafter, the ED had lodged a money-laundering case in this regard in 2017.
Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.
We, however, have a request.
As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.
Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.