SC notice to ED on bail plea by ex Delhi Minister Jain

The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate on a plea by former Delhi Minister and AAP leader Satyendar Jain seeking bail in a money laundering case.

A bench of Justices A S Bopanna and Hima Kohli sought a response from the central agency on his petition against the Delhi High Court's denying him any relief.

Appearing for Jain, senior advocate A M Singhvi said his client has extreme health problems, he has lost 35 kgs and he is a skeleton now.

Also Read | Supreme Court to hear plea against Gyanvapi shivling survey on May 19

The bench, while agreeing to examine the matter, gave the petitioner a liberty to move vacation bench.

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju appeared for the Enforcement Directorate.

In April this year, the Delhi High Court had dismissed Jain and his two aides' bail pleas in a money laundering case being probed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma said that Jain is an influential person and cannot be said to have satisfied the twin conditions for bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The twin conditions are “reasonable grounds for believing that she/he is not guilty of such offence”; and “she/he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail”.

"The simple fact is the CBI has filed a case of disproportionate assets. The present court cannot go into the validity of these proceedings. Facts show that certain assets were masked. The court has to see the prima facie case.The broad probabilities indicate that the companies associated with him are controlled and managed by him. Learned special judge order (rejecting bail to Jain) does not have any perversity. Order is well reasoned," the judge said.

Jain, arrested on May 30, 2022, has been lodged in Tihar jail here.

A trial court had, on November 17, 2022, dismissed the leader's bail application.

According to the trial court, it has prima facie come on record that Satyendar Jain was "actually involved" in hiding the proceeds of crime by paying cash to entry operators based in Kolkata and then bringing the money into three companies against the sale of shares to demonstrate that their revenues were clean.

The court had also pointed out it has 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 namely, M/s Manglayatan Developers/Projects Pvt Ltd, M/s Akinchan Developers Pvt Ltd and M/s Paryas Infosolutions Pvt Ltd against the sale of shares to show that income of these three companies was untainted one.