Delhi HC rejects Satyendra Jain’s bail plea, Sisodia strikes HC for bail

On Thursday, sixth April 2023, the Delhi High Court rejected the bail plea filed by Aam Aadmi Party chief Satyendra Jain and two totally different co-accused Ankush Jain and Vaibhav Jain in a money laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate. On March 21, the bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma had reserved the choice on this bail plea.

In one different case, Manish Sisodia, the chief of the AAP, filed a petition with the Delhi High Court troublesome the trial courtroom’s dedication to refuse him bail throughout the CBI lawsuit regarding the Delhi liquor protection rip-off. The case will in all probability be heard subsequent on April 20, as Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma issued uncover to the CBI to file a reply inside two weeks.

The courtroom’s observations on Satyendra Jain

While saying the order rejecting bail for Jain, the courtroom observed that the broad likelihood signifies that the 4 companies concerned on this case have been instantly or indirectly managed and operated by Satyendra Jain. The courtroom emphasised the repeatedly altering pattern of the shareholdings of the company to deduce this conclusion

The courtroom acknowledged, “The shareholding patterns also show that petitioner Satyendra Kumar Jain or his family is controlling them directly or indirectly. The petitioner Satyendra Jain is an influential person and has the potential to tamper with the evidence, as indicated by his conduct during the custody.”

Enforcement Directorate’s argument in opposition to the accused AAP chief

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju represented the ED sooner than the courtroom. He argued that when the trial courtroom had rejected bail, it had acknowledged that the accused was a enterprise affiliate and that the money clearly belonged to Satyendra Jain. ASG had further contended that the accused was controlling the people answerable for working the enterprise. Furthermore, it was acknowledged that the transaction befell after the “entire sum had been stamped in the name of Satyendra Jain.”

ASG SV Raju acknowledged, “Money laundering is crystal clear. Their case is that Satyendra Jain has nothing to do with it. I have to establish that Satyendra Jain was in the thick of these things.” ASG SV Raju argued that the actual remedy extended by the jail authorities to Satyendra Jain confirmed that the ED’s apprehension all by means of was applicable that being a former minister of prisons and nicely being he was receiving favorable remedy from the jail officers along with the jail docs.

He added, “The above facts are borne out from the CCTV video footage of the Tihar jail premises submitted by the Directorate before the PMLA special judge.” He acknowledged that there is a sturdy likelihood that the petitioner will try and hinder the Act’s processes after being freed.

Satyendra Jain’s lawyer claimed that he is not involved the least bit

Advocate N Hariharan appeared for Satyendra Jain. He had completed his submissions all through a listening to on January 25. At that time, he submitted, “Where is Satyendra Jain involved? How is the money related to me? My (Satyendra Jain’s) assets before and after the cheque period remained the same.” He contended that the company’s property cannot be generally known as the property of Satyendra Jain and that the company belongs to Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain.

N Hariharan pleaded for Satyendra Jain’s bail. He acknowledged, “I (Satyendra Jain) have never been on flight risk, even the trial court had stated the same while dismissing my first bail plea. It was dismissed on the ground that at that time chargesheet wasn’t filed. Now chargesheet is filed. I clear the tripod test. I am liable for bail.”

The trial courtroom denied bail to Satyendra Jain in November 2022

On November 17, Special Judge Vikas Dhull of the Rouse Avenue Court dismissed Jain’s request for bail throughout the case involving money laundering. Satyendra Jain requested bail in connection collectively along with his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate on May 31, 2022, for a money laundering offence.

Assets related to Jain and his family worth Rs. 4.81 crores have been linked by the ED in April. Based on an FIR filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in opposition to Jain and others beneath pertinent sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, the ED launched an inquiry. The AAP chief is accused of using the Hawala group to acquire as a lot as Rs. 4.81 crores from shell companies whereas he was a public servant by companies he owned and managed.

Manish Sisodia strikes extreme courtroom as a result of the trial courtroom denied bail

On Thursday, sixth April 2023, Manish Sisodia filed a petition throughout the Delhi High Court in the hunt for bail in a case in opposition to CBI regarding the Delhi Liquor Policy Scam case. Senior Advocates Dayan Krishnan and Mohit Mathur appeared for Sisodia. Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Anupam Sharma appeared for CBI.

Advocate Dayan Krishnan acknowledged whereas submitting Manish Sisodia’s plea, “This is the case where everyone has been granted bail except me by the trial court. Many of them have not even been arrested.” Advocate Mohit Mathur acknowledged, “In this case, 7 persons were charged, 5 have still not been arrested and 2 were granted bail before filing of chargesheet, another person arrested in February was again granted bail by the same court.”

Advocate Dayan Krishnan moreover acknowledged, “Public Servants against whom they say there are allegations are not even arrested. Request the Court to hear the matter at the earliest.” the courtroom has issued uncover to the CBI to file a reply on this case inside two weeks. The courtroom will hear this case as soon as extra on April 20.

On March 31, Special Judge MK Nagpal of Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi rejected Manish Sisodia’s bail utility throughout the CBI case. Sisodia had “the most essential and vital part” throughout the felony conspiracy, and he had been “intimately involved” throughout the creation and execution of the abovementioned protection, the courtroom had observed whereas rejecting the bail petition. On March 24, the courtroom reserved judgment on the matter, throughout which the courtroom generally known as Manish Sisodia to be the architect of the conspiracy.