Delhi Court issues summons to four companies in Satyendar Jain case

New Delhi, Jan 5 (Agency) A Delhi court on Thursday issued summon to four companies that had facilitated Delhi’s Health Minister Satyendar Jain in acquiring dis-proportionate assets by allowing their respective bank accounts to be used for parking of his unaccounted income. Vikash Dhull, Special Judge in the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court after the hearing said, “Although the matter is fixed today for consideration of charge, on perusal of the chargesheet and the documents filed along with it, this court is of the opinion that there are other accused persons, who are required to be summoned for abetting the commission of the offence U/s 13(1)(e) of PC Act 1988”. “The following four companies i.e.(1) M/s J.J. Ideal Estate Pvt. Ltd. (2) M/s Mangalayatan Developers/Projects Pvt. Ltd. (3) M/s Akinchan Developers Pvt. Ltd. and (4) M/s Paryas Infosolutions Pvt. Ltd. had abetted the commission of the offence by facilitating accsed Satyendar Jain in acquiring dis-proportionate assets during the check period by allowing their respective bank accounts to be used for parking of unaccounted income of Satyendar Jain.

Hence, there is sufficient material to summon the aforementioned four companies for the offence U/s 109 IPC r/w 13(1)(e) of PC Act 1988. Accordingly, issue summons to the above mentioned four companies for 16.01.2023,” the court said. The court directed accused Satyendar Jain, Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain be produced from JC through video conference on the next date of hearing. On CBI’s request for supplying a copy of the order, the court directed the copy of the order be given to Senior Public Prosecutor for CBI. The proxy counsel for Satyendar Jain prayed for adjournment on the ground that senior counsel was not available in court. After hearing this request, the court allowed the same as not opposed by the Prosecution. The Enforcement Directorate arrested Jain in a money laundering case based on a CBI probe against him in 2017 under the Prevention of Corruption Act under which he was accused of having laundered money through four companies allegedly linked to him. UNI XC SSP