New Delhi [India], November 11 (ANI): A CBI court at Rouse Avenue on Friday reserved its order on the bail plea by Delhi minister Satyender Jain in the money laundering case under PMLA. The court is likely to pronounce its order next Wednesday, November 16.
After hearing the arguments from Jain’s counsel and the Enforcement Directorate (ED), Special CBI Judge Vikas Dhull reserved his order on the plea. The court is to pronounce the order at 3 pm on November 16.
Jain’s counsel submitted that the investigation has been completed and the chargesheet has been filed. No case of money laundering is made out against the applicant, the counsel said.
Senior advocates N Hariharan and Rahul Mehra, representing Jain, alleged that a conspiracy for money laundering was hatched in 2010. At the time, Jain was neither an MLA nor a minister, they added, questioning, “How could he have hatch a conspiracy for money laundering?”
It was also submitted that the other accused in the case have admitted that the money allegedly laundered belongs to them as per the chargesheet and Jain has nothing to do with the companies in question, the advocates further argued.
Opposing the bail plea, ASG S V Raju, representing the Enforcement Directorate (ED), submitted that there are witnesses and materials sufficient to make out a case of money laundering against the accused.
The ASG further claimed that the accused was involved in money laundering with the other accused. Jain sent money, which belongs to him, to Kolkata-based companies, the ASG added, claiming that the AAP leader is the conspirator and kingpin.
Earlier, Special CBI Judge Geetanjali Goel had dismissed the bail plea on June 18.
The ED arrested Jain on May 30 and a trial court sent him to judicial custody.
After the filing of the chargesheet, a bail application was moved on behalf of Jain.
The district judge transferred the bail hearing to another judge after the ED submitted that there was an apprehension of bias during the hearing.
Jain moved Delhi High Court challenging the trial court order
The trial court order was challenged by Jain before the High Court but the plea was dismissed. Later, a plea was moved before the Supreme Court but was withdrawn.
Senior advocate N Hariharan, arguing for Jain, had earlier submitted that the companies that purchased land were not controlled by Jain and he held very small shares in them. The companies and shareholders are separate entities. (ANI)
This report is filed by ANI news service. TheNewsMill holds no responsibility for this content.