Supreme Court Extends Interim Bail Granted to AAP Leader Satyendar Jain In Money Laundering Case By 5 Weeks

A bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and Bela M Trivedi was considering Jain’s plea challenging the decision of the Delhi High Court to deny him bail last year.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing on behalf of Jail, argued for an extension of the interim bail on the ground that the legislator has undergone spinal surgery. The senior counsel told the bench:

"Jain has had a very serious operation called microdiscectomy and partial laminectomy. He cannot even turn over on his side. Any literature will show that he will need at least six weeks' time to recover. Your Lordships may take the report from the people who have operated on him after that and list it accordingly. 

"I am not opposing what they are saying. We want an independent evaluation." Additional Solicitor-General SV Raju said, before adding, "In two weeks..."

"Two weeks will be futile," Singhvi strongly protested, "He has had a spine operation."

Justice Bopanna said, "Let's extend this by four weeks. We'll see what is the position then. On that day, if required, independent evaluation can be done."

When the law officer urged the court to direct an independent evaluation to be conducted in the meantime, Justice Bopanna said, "Now, he has just undergone an operation. Any independent evaluation will say he is bad. After four weeks, if he has recovered, an independent evaluation will have some meaning."

"Our independent evaluation will probably suggest that he does not require any hospitalisation or bed rest. To again postpone this for four weeks..." ASG Raju argued.

"That's a very cruel statement," Singhvi exclaimed.

"Sometimes, we should not be too harsh," the judge intervened. After Singhvi requested the bench to grant an extension of six weeks instead of four, the bench also agreed to extend the interim bail granted to Jain by five weeks. It pronounced:

"The petitioner has undergone spine surgery. The respondent has filed an application seeking an independent medical evaluation. The said application is kept pending for the present. However, taking note that an operation for spine surgery has been performed on July 21, we deem it appropriate, as an interim measure, to extend interim bail by five weeks. List the petition on the said date. If need be, the application for medical evaluation will be considered at that point."

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, Indo Metalimpex, 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 earlier this month.

Case Title

Satyendar Kumar Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 6561 of 2023

Click Here To Read/Download Order