Delhi High Court denies bail to AAP's Satyendar Jain in money laundering case

The Delhi High Court on Thursday denied bail to former Delhi cabinet minister and senior Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyendar Jain in the money laundering case registered against him by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). .Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held 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 simple fact is the CBI has filed a case of disproportionate assets (DA). The present court cannot go into validity of these proceedings. Facts show that certain DA were masked. The court has to see the prima facie case.The broad probabilities indicate that the companies associated to 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 High Court said.Justice Sharma added that there are chances that Jain may tamper with the evidence and this has been indicated by his conduct during custody. "The accused person is influential. The petitioner cannot be held to have cleared the twin conditions under PMLA," the Court held.The Court pronounced the order after having reserved it on March 22..Through a detailed order, Justice Sharma also denied bail to Satyendar Jain's co-accused Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain. .Satyendar Jain has been behind bars since May 2022 when he was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The trial court had rejected his bail plea on November 17, 2022. He challenged the order before the High Court on December 1, 2022..The High Court heard Senior Advocate N Hariharan for Jain and Additional Solicitor General SV Raju representing the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for over a month before finally reserving its verdict. .The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had initially registered a case under Sections 13(2) (criminal misconduct by public servant) read with 13(e) (disproportionate assets) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against Jain.The case was registered on the allegation that Jain had acquired movable properties in the name of various persons between 2015 and 2017 which he could not satisfactorily account for.Later, the ED also registered a case and alleged several companies beneficially owned and controlled by him received accommodation entries amounting to ₹4.81 crore from shell companies against cash transferred to Kolkata-based entry operators through a hawala route..While denying bail to Jain, Special Judge Vikas Dhull had observed that Jain was not entitled to the benefit of bail with respect to the twin conditions under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act."In the opinion of this court, ‘proceeds of crime’ was the amount which was generated by applicant/accused Satyendar Kumar Jain while working as a Minister in the Government of Delhi, for which he could not satisfactorily account for," the court underlined.