New Delhi: Rajya Sabha MP Amar Singh's counsel Ram Jethmalani on Monday made a u-turn and named Congress leader Ahmed Patel as the source for the money in the 2008 cash-for-vote scam, before a Delhi court.

READ MORE: Amar Singh bail extended till Sept 27

Arguing for the bail to former Samajwadi Party leader, the senior advocate named Patel, changing his earlier statement that the money could have come from BJP since L K Advani had said that his party had conducted a sting operation.

Jethmalani told Special Judge Sangita Dhingra Sehgal that the bribe was paid at the Le Meridien Hotel here.

"The place of receipt of the bribe was not Amar Singh's home, but Le Meridien Hotel. The person to pay the bribe was not Mr Amar Singh but obviously Mr Ahmad Patel, an MP and a very influential member of the party whose government was to be saved," said Jethmalani.

Terming Patel as the "bribe giver", Jethmalani said, "I am not suggesting that Patel, on this piece of evidence, should be convicted but if you are influencing MPs of other parties on behalf of your party, then you are the bribe giver."

Earlier on September 12, while arguing for interim bail for Amar Singh, Jethmalani had said that the money produced in Lok Sabha during the cash-for-vote scam was "likely to be from the BJP".

"If the money was waved (in Lok Sabha) by the BJP MPs, then the source of the money is likely to be from the BJP. I am not prejudicing anybody's case.

"There is no allegation that Amar Singh arranged the money," Jethmalani had told the court on that day.

Kulkarni fails to appear in court

Meanwhile, senior BJP leader LK Advani's former aide Sudheendra Kulkarni, summoned by a Delhi court for his alleged role in the 2008 cash-for-vote scam, on Monday failed to appear before it and pleaded that he be exempted from personal appearance for the day.

Submitting an application for exemption from personal appearance to the court of Special Judge Sangeeta Dhingra Sehgal, Kulkarni's counsel told her that his client was yet to return from the US.

On the counsel's submission, the judge pointed out to him that earlier on September 6, while making the plea for exemption from personal appearance, he had given an undertaking that he would appear before the court on the next date (on Monday).

"He (Kulkarni) was supposed to come (to the court) today. You (Kulkarni's lawyer) had given an undertaking on the last date," the judge said. The defence counsel responded to the court's observation saying Kulkarni had not appeared on Monday due to "some problem".

Public prosecutor Rajiv Mohan contended that the application for personal exemption on behalf of Kulkarni was without any supporting documents. He said the court could issue warrant against him for his failure to appear before it despite summons.

At this stage, Kulkarni's lawyer submitted that his client would appear before the judge after October 2.

The court is expected to decide on the application for personal exemption during the course of the proceedings.

Meanwhile, during the arguments, co-accused Suhail Hindustani collapsed in the courtroom. He was moved out of the courtroom by security personnel and was attended to by doctors.