Fertiliser scam: Delhi High Court grants bail to RJD MP Amrendra Dhari Singh on 'merits and medical grounds' in money laundering case

The Delhi High Court on Thursday granted bail “on merits and on medical grounds” to RJD Rajya Sabha MP Amarendra Dhari Singh, arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with an alleged money laundering case linked to a fertiliser scam. [Amrendra Dhari Singh v. Directorate of Enforcement]

“I am of the considered opinion, that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail on merits as well as on medical grounds,” held Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar.

Senior counsel Sidharth Luthra appearing for Singh argued that not even a single summon under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure was issued to the petitioner directing him to join the investigation and he was arrested by flouting each and every procedure prescribed for arrest of a person.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with the case had registered a case on May 17, 2021 under Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 420 (cheating) IPC and relevant provisions under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against Singh and others.

It was claimed that the foundation of the FIR registered by the CBI is the disclosure statement of one Rajiv Saxena and documents submitted by him. The senior counsel submitted that Saxena was an accused in the FIR and also the Augusta Westland chopper deal case.

The counsel submitted that initially Saxena was made an approver in the Augusta Westland case but in less than seven months a revocation of the tender of pardon granted to him Saxena was sought on grounds of submission of forged bank statements and other documents during the investigation.

Singh was also stated to be a member of the Rajya Sabha from Bihar and having a business of fertiliser trading and consultancy and a tax payee. It was argued that there was not even an iota of an allegation by the ED that he had misused his position as a member of the Standing Committee of Fertilisers.

The court was informed by the defence counsel that Singh had travelled overseas about 90 times since the receipt of the first notice in a Foreign Exchange Management Act enquiry, stated to be identical to the present case, and returned to the country despite pendency of various enquiries and investigation therefore not a flight risk.

Additional Solicitor General S V Raju opposed the bail on the ground that the allegations against Singh were of serious nature with him being involved in money laundering, a serious economic offence. He stated that in view of the Supreme Court of India, the economic offenders constitute a class apart and be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail.

Singh being a sitting Rajya Sabha MP and a Member of Parliamentary Standing Committee of Fertilisers was stated be a powerful and influential person and in all likelihood would tamper with the evidence.

The ASG alleged that Singh had not cooperated in the investigation being evasive. Raju also submitted that Singh’s health condition was stable and did not warrant bail on medical grounds.

“Regarding the flight risk, it is the admitted case of the department that over the period of last 10 years the petitioner has gone abroad at least 90 times for various purposes. The petitioner was even allowed to travel abroad by this Court twice subject to conditions despite the opening of LOC (look out circular) against him and the registration of the FIR by the CBI. Therefore, when such is the conduct of the petitioner, he cannot be said to be a flight risk. Moreover, nothing has been placed on record that the petitioner/accused is a flight risk nor much emphasis was laid on this during the argument,” observed the court.

The court further noted, “No doubt, as argued by the ASG, the condition of the petitioner is not serious and do not require immediate attention and his present condition is manageable, but one also cannot lose sight of the fact that the petitioner is a known case of cancer and is suffering from various diseases.”

The bail was allowed on conditions;

(i)On furnishing personal bond in the sum of ₹10,00,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

(ii) He shall not leave the country without permission of the Special Court, the passport if already not deposited, shall be deposited with the Special Court.

(iii) He shall make himself available for investigation, if required by the prosecuting agency.

(iv) He shall not influence the prosecution witnesses directly or remotely