A bench of Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma deferred that matter after Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Jain, argued at length and later requested an adjournment
Satyendar Jain. File Pic
The Supreme Court on Monday extended the interim bail given to AAP leader Satyendar Jain until further orders in a money laundering case.
ADVERTISEMENT
A bench of Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma deferred that matter after Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Jain, argued at length and later requested an adjournment. The matter will be listed tomorrow.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Satyendar Jain, took the court through the genesis of the case against his client.
Senior Advocate Singhvi told the court that Jain has cooperated in the matter and there is no predicate offence made against the former minister.
The lawyer said that according to the law, assets of a company can never be attributed to a shareholder or director and he asked how money can be attributed to Jain, which lies in the company.
Additional Solicitor General, SV Raju, appeared for the probe agency.
Meanwhile, the hearing on Jain's bail witnessed many twists and turns today as Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud explained why the matter was listed before a different combination of benches as there was a matter relating to the extension of bail. CJI also mentioned the communication received from Justice AS Bopanna to take up part-heard matters from him because he will not be able to hear the matter due to medical reasons.
Earlier, Jain's bail plea was partly heard by a bench of Justices AS Bopanna and Bela M. Trivedi. Today, the matter is listed before a bench of Justice Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma.
Jain underwent surgery on July 21. The interim bail given to Jain on medical grounds is extended from time to time.
On May 26, the top court granted interim bail to Satyendar Jain for six weeks in the money laundering case but imposed various conditions, including refusing to talk with the media nor leaving Delhi without permission.
The top court had also given Jain the right to choose any hospital of his choice for his medical treatment. The top court had made it clear that interim bail is considered in medical conditions.
Satyendar Jain has moved to the top court seeking bail in money laundering cases. He has challenged the Delhi High Court order dismissing his bail plea in the money laundering case against him.
Satyendar Jain's lawyer had told the top court that he had lost 35 kg and turned into a skeleton due to this.
Former Delhi minister Satyendar Jain has moved the Supreme Court to challenge the Delhi High Court order dismissing his bail plea in the money laundering case against him.
On April 6, the Delhi High Court dismissed the bail plea of Satyendar Jain. The HC, while dismissing the Satyendar Jain bail plea, stated that the applicant is an influential person and has the potential to tamper with evidence. Satyender Jain/applicant, at this stage, can't be held to clear the twin conditions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The HC had kept the order reserved for March 21 after the conclusion of the submissions made by the defence and prosecution sides after multiple hearings. During arguments in the High Court, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju appeared for the Enforcement Directorate, contented that money laundering is crystal clear against Jain and other co-accused. In his bail plea, Jain stated, "I appeared before the ED on seven occasions. I have cooperated and participated in the investigation. I was arrested five years down the line in 2022."
On November 17, 2022, the trial court dismissed the bail petition of Satyendar Jain. He was arrested on May 30, 2022, under sections of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) by the Enforcement Directorate and is presently in Judicial Custody in the case.
The ED case is based on a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) complaint registered on the allegation that Satyendar Jain had acquired movable properties in the name of various persons from February 14, 2015, to May 31, 2017, which he could not satisfactorily account for.
This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
