Satyendar Jain moved SC against Delhi HC order which rejected him bail in Money Laundering case

New Delhi, Jan 9 (FN Bureau) The Supreme Court on Monday partially heard the arguments of AAP leader Satyendar Jain challenging the Delhi High Court order denying bail to the leader in April last year in a case of alleged Money Laundering against him. The arguments commenced before a bench of Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal on the denial of bail by the Delhi High Court.Satyender Jain was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate on May 30, 2022, but was granted interim bail by the Apex court on medical grounds on May 26, 2023, which was extended from time to time.the CBI had accused Jain and others of laundering money to the tune of INR 11.78 crores during 2010-2012 and INR 4.63 crores during 2015-16, when he had become a minister in Delhi government, through three companies viz. Paryas Infosolution, Indo Metal Impex, Akinchan Developers and Mangalayatan Projects.

Jain was accused of giving money to some Kolkata-based entry operators of different shell companies for accommodation entries through his associates, who then allegedly re-routed the money in the form of investment through shares in Jain-linked companies after “layering them through shell companies” Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared for Jain and contended that no predicate offence could be made out against Jain, and as a consequence, there was no case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act as well. No share was purchased by Jain in the relevant check period (2015-17). As there was no such purchase, there could neither be any DA (disproportionate assets), nor a predicate offence, Singhvi argued. Justice Bela Trivedi said that the chargesheet has been filed, which has not been quashed. So the existence of predicate offence is there. Singhvi replied, let Mr Raju show an allegation, not proof, where he has alleged purchase of any single share by Jain after 2010 Since no such allegation, and since the check period original and end reveal the same figure, predicate offence cannot be made out, Singhvi said.

Counsels appearing for ED, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, Advocate on record (AOR) Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Advocates Zoheb Hussain, Rajat Nair, Annam Venkate Gurnani Singhvi further said that all monies allegedly coming from the Kolkata operators had gone to co-accused Vaibhav and Ankush Jain’s companies. The shares issued in return for accommodation entries had also gone to their companies and not to Jain. Yet, ED and CBI were attributing the assets of the aforementioned companies to Jain, and the same was not impermissible under law. Singhvi said that Jain had fully cooperated with the investigation agencies for over 5 years and at least 7 visits were made to ED but no compelling reason to arrest arose. Jain was ultimately arrested after 5 years of registration of the case. Singhvi said that Jain is a public servant with full roots in Delhi so there is no likelihood of him evading the process of law if regular bail is granted to him. Besides Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, AOR Vivek Jain, Advocates Abhinav Jain, Amit Bhandari, Rajat Jain, Mohd. Irshad, Siddhant Sahay, and Sharian Mukherjee appeared for Jain. The hearing will continue tomorrow.