When faced with documentation to indicate his affiliation with organisations in connection with a money laundering case, Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Minister Satyendar Jain cited memory loss owing to COVID-19, according to the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Before Special Judge Geetanjli Goel, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju argued against the Minister’s bail.
“During our investigation, we came across several similar transactions involving the Lala Sher Singh Trust, of which he was the President…
We began by asking him for the names of the businesses and trusts with which he is affiliated. He didn’t say whether or not he knew Sher Singh. “Today he has,” Raju argued, alluding to a defence attorney’s submission.
According to the ASG, Jain initially stated that he had no knowledge of the trust in question, but later changed his mind and stated that he had nothing to do with it.
“He claimed he’d never heard of the trust.” He went on to say that no one in his family is participating… Hide first, then say nothing about this trust. He was faced with documents that proved his claims to ED were untrue. He’s improved a little since his denial. He then claims that he had COVID-19, which caused him to lose his memory. When presented with documents, he claims to have memory loss,” Raju stated.
Senior Advocate N Hariharan and Advocate Bhavook Chauhan, who represented Jain, maintained that the ED had attempted to establish a link between the Minister accused and those with ‘Jain’ surnames. Satyendar Jain, on the other hand, was said to be unrelated to all Jains.
“This does not imply that Satyendar Jain is related to all Jains in the country,” the senior lawyer explained.
Jain, who was sentenced to 14 days of court remand on Monday, also cited his bad health, including sleep apnea, as a reason for his request for bail.
His lawyer pointed out that because the evidence had already been obtained, there was no way to tamper with it.
“There are witnesses available. There is no charge of manipulating witnesses anywhere, hence it passes the triple test. There was no such accusation levelled against me when I was outside and had a chance to influence. “It was purposefully elevated to defeat bail,” Hariharan claimed.
The ED was also said to have calculated the excessive assets as well as established the alleged money trail in the case.
It was also claimed that Jain had appeared and recorded his remarks in front of the investigative agency seven times and had cooperated with the agency on “every scope.”
According to ASG Raju, the case fundamentally concerned money laundering and the conversion of cash into something that appeared to be legal.
Judge Goel inquired of the ASG as to what was still to be discovered. He reacted by adding that he needed to see more entries or a money trail because Jain had been uncooperative throughout the investigation.
On June 18, a decision on Jain’s bail request will be made.
The CBI had initially filed a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Sections 13(2) (criminal misconduct by public servant) and 13(e) (disproportionate assets). The complaint was filed when it was discovered that Jain had purchased movable properties in the names of several people between 2015 and 2017 (the check period) that he could not account for.
Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, the ED provisionally attached immovable properties worth Rs.4.81 crore belonging to M/s Akinchan Developers Pvt Ltd, M/s Indo Metal Impex Pvt Ltd, M/s Paryas Infosolutions Pvt Ltd, M/s Manglayatan Projects Pvt Ltd, M/s JJ Ideal Estate Pvt Ltd, and other persons on April 5 this year, based on its
According to the enforcement agency, between 2015 and 2016, when Jain was a public servant, these companies “beneficially owned and controlled by him” received accommodation entries worth Rs.4.81 crore from shell companies in exchange for cash transferred to Kolkata-based entry operators via a hawala route.