Supreme Court Adjourns Bail Hearing Of AAP Leader Satyendar Jain In Money Laundering Case Until December 4; Interim Bail To Continue
The Supreme Court on Friday (November 24) adjourned the hearing of Satyendar Jain's bail plea until Monday, December 4. However, it agreed to extend the interim bail granted earlier this year to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader until the next date of hearing. A bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and Bela M Trivedi is currently hearing the former Delhi government cabinet minister's special...
The Supreme Court on Friday (November 24) adjourned the hearing of Satyendar Jain's bail plea until Monday, December 4. However, it agreed to extend the interim bail granted earlier this year to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader until the next date of hearing.
A bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and Bela M Trivedi is currently hearing the former Delhi government cabinet minister's special leave petition challenging a decision of the Delhi High Court to deny him bail in April. Jain was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in May 2022 and was granted interim bail due to medical reasons in May.
In August, the court extended Jain’s interim bail for the second time after Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the embattled legislator, stated that he was undergoing rehabilitation following a complex spinal operation. Despite opposition from Additional Solicitor-General SV Raju, who advocated for an independent examination by AIIMS and a cancellation of interim bail, the bench agreed to defer Jain’s surrender. Since then, the case has witnessed a number of adjournments. But during one such hearing that subsequently got adjourned, the additional solicitor-general flagged alleged delay tactics being used by Jain to push back the trial court hearing. In response, the apex court directed him to 'diligently' participate in the ongoing proceedings before the trial court. "It is made clear pendency of proceedings before this court or any reason shall not be used as an excuse or ruse to defer proceedings before trial court, but would diligently take part in proceedings before the trial court and permit the case to progress," the bench ordered.
The law officer's allegation, however, was met with opposition from the petitioner's lawyer on the last occasion. Among other things, Singhvi also questioned the necessity of Jain's arrest, pointing to the need to show a "demonstrable, obvious, and palpable reason for making an arrest". Since his arrest in May last year, Jain has spent almost an entire year in jail before finally being released on interim medical bail to undergo a spinal operation, the senior counsel told the court. Responding to the ED's claim that Jain was the beneficiary and controller of the 'irregular' transactions under its scanner, Singhvi pointed out he was neither a director of any of the three companies that allegedly received laundered money after being routed through Kolkata-based shell companies in the form of investments, nor had he financially benefitted from the amounts that were suspected to have been transferred from the three companies to co-accused Vaibhav and Ankush Jain.
The hearing today was adjourned since Justice Trivedi was sitting in a two-judge combination with Justice Satish Chandra Sharma. After deliberating with both Singhvi and ASG Raju, the hearing was deferred until Monday, December 4. The interim bail granted to Satyendar Jain, as well as co-accused Ankush and Vaibhab, was also extended by the court till then.
Background
In 2017, the Central Bureau of Investigation accused Jain and others of laundering money to the tune of Rs 11.78 crore during 2010-2012 and Rs 4.63 crores during 2015-16, when he had become a minister in the Delhi government. It was alleged that the money laundering exercise was carried out through three companies – Paryas Infosolution, Akinchan Developers, and Mangalayatan Projects.
Jain allegedly had given money to some Kolkata-based entry operators of different shell companies for accommodation entries, through his associates. The entry operators had then allegedly re-routed the money in the form of investment through shares in Jain-linked companies after ‘layering them through shell companies’.
The case lodged by the Directorate of Enforcement is based on the CBI complaint and alleges that Jain signed conveyance deeds for the purchase of agricultural lands by Prayas Infosolutions in 2011 and 2012. The central agency has further alleged that the land was later transferred to family members of Jain's associates who denied knowledge about the transfers.
Last year, the ED year attached properties worth Rs. 4.81 crores belonging to five companies and others in the money laundering case against Jain and others. These assets reportedly were in the name of Akinchan Developers, Indo Metal Impex, Paryas Infosolutions, Mangalayatan Projects, and J.J. Ideal Estate etc. The Aam Aadmi Party leader was taken in custody in connection with the money laundering case on May 30, 2022.
In November of last year, the bail application of the former cabinet minister was dismissed by a trial court, which said that it had prima facie come on record that Jain was ‘actually involved’ in concealing the proceeds of crime by giving cash to the Kolkata-based entry operators and thereafter, bringing the cash into three companies against the sale of shares to show that income of these three companies was untainted.
Subsequently, his bail was denied by the Delhi High Court as well in April, on the ground that he was an influential person and had the potential of tampering with evidence. As such, the twin conditions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 were held to not be satisfied. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma also denied bail to co-accused Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain.
In May, a vacation bench headed by Justice JK Maheshwari granted interim bail to the Aam Aadmi Party leader on medical grounds, which was extended by the court in July.
Case Title
Satyendar Kumar Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 6561 of 2023