On Thursday, 6th April 2023, the Delhi High Court rejected the bail plea filed by Aam Aadmi Party leader Satyendra Jain and two other co-accused Ankush Jain and Vaibhav Jain in a money laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate. On March 21, the bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma had reserved the verdict on this bail plea.
In another case, Manish Sisodia, the leader of the AAP, filed a petition with the Delhi High Court challenging the trial court’s decision to refuse him bail in the CBI lawsuit concerning the Delhi liquor policy scam. The case will be heard next on April 20, as Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma issued notice to the CBI to file a reply within two weeks.
The court’s observations on Satyendra Jain
While pronouncing the order rejecting bail for Jain, the court observed that the broad probability indicates that the four companies concerned in this case were directly or indirectly controlled and operated by Satyendra Jain. The court emphasized the continuously changing pattern of the shareholdings of the company to deduce this conclusion
The court said, “The shareholding patterns also show that petitioner Satyendra Kumar Jain or his family is controlling them directly or indirectly. The petitioner Satyendra Jain is an influential person and has the potential to tamper with the evidence, as indicated by his conduct during the custody.”
Enforcement Directorate’s argument against the accused AAP leader
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju represented the ED before the court. He argued that when the trial court had rejected bail, it had said that the accused was a business partner and that the money clearly belonged to Satyendra Jain. ASG had further contended that the accused was controlling the people responsible for running the business. Furthermore, it was said that the transaction took place after the “entire sum had been stamped in the name of Satyendra Jain.”
ASG SV Raju said, “Money laundering is crystal clear. Their case is that Satyendra Jain has nothing to do with it. I have to establish that Satyendra Jain was in the thick of these things.” ASG SV Raju argued that the special treatment extended by the prison authorities to Satyendra Jain showed that the ED’s apprehension throughout was correct that being a former minister of prisons and health he was receiving favorable treatment from the prison officials including the prison doctors.
He added, “The above facts are borne out from the CCTV video footage of the Tihar jail premises submitted by the Directorate before the PMLA special judge.” He said that there is a strong chance that the petitioner will try to obstruct the Act’s processes after being freed.
Satyendra Jain’s lawyer claimed that he is not involved at all
Advocate N Hariharan appeared for Satyendra Jain. He had completed his submissions during a hearing on January 25. At that time, he submitted, “Where is Satyendra Jain involved? How is the money related to me? My (Satyendra Jain’s) assets before and after the cheque period remained the same.” He contended that the company’s assets cannot be called the assets of Satyendra Jain and that the company belongs to Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain.
N Hariharan pleaded for Satyendra Jain’s bail. He said, “I (Satyendra Jain) have never been on flight risk, even the trial court had stated the same while dismissing my first bail plea. It was dismissed on the ground that at that time chargesheet wasn’t filed. Now chargesheet is filed. I clear the tripod test. I am liable for bail.”
The trial court denied bail to Satyendra Jain in November 2022
On November 17, Special Judge Vikas Dhull of the Rouse Avenue Court dismissed Jain’s request for bail in the case involving money laundering. Satyendra Jain requested bail in connection with his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate on May 31, 2022, for a money laundering offence.
Assets related to Jain and his family worth Rs. 4.81 crores were attached by the ED in April. Based on an FIR filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against Jain and others under pertinent sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, the ED launched an inquiry. The AAP leader is accused of using the Hawala network to receive up to Rs. 4.81 crores from shell companies while he was a public servant through companies he owned and controlled.
Manish Sisodia moves high court as the trial court denied bail
On Thursday, 6th April 2023, Manish Sisodia filed a petition in the Delhi High Court seeking bail in a case against CBI regarding the Delhi Liquor Policy Scam case. Senior Advocates Dayan Krishnan and Mohit Mathur appeared for Sisodia. Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Anupam Sharma appeared for CBI.
Advocate Dayan Krishnan said while submitting Manish Sisodia’s plea, “This is the case where everyone has been granted bail except me by the trial court. Many of them have not even been arrested.” Advocate Mohit Mathur said, “In this case, 7 persons were charged, 5 have still not been arrested and 2 were granted bail before filing of chargesheet, another person arrested in February was again granted bail by the same court.”
Advocate Dayan Krishnan also said, “Public Servants against whom they say there are allegations are not even arrested. Request the Court to hear the matter at the earliest.” the court has issued notice to the CBI to file a reply in this case within two weeks. The court will hear this case again on April 20.
On March 31, Special Judge MK Nagpal of Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi rejected Manish Sisodia’s bail application in the CBI case. Sisodia had “the most essential and vital part” in the criminal conspiracy, and he had been “intimately involved” in the creation and execution of the abovementioned policy, the court had observed while rejecting the bail petition. On March 24, the court reserved judgment on the matter, in which the court called Manish Sisodia to be the architect of the conspiracy.
