New Delhi: A special PMLA court in Delhi on Friday took cognizance of the Enforcement Directorate chargesheet filed against the Delhi cabinet minister. Satyendra JainPrima facie validates the findings of the probe agency that the minister and his family members were involved in laundering of over Rs 16 crore through four shell companies.
The ED on July 27 filed a charge sheet against Jain, his wife Poonam Jain, Ajit Prasad Jain, Sunil Kumar Jain, Vaibhav Jain, Ankush Jain, Akinchen Developers Pvt Ltd, Mangalayatan Developers Pvt Ltd, JJ Ideal Estate Pvt Ltd and Paryas Infosolutions. was. private limited tnn
The Court said, “In view of the material on record, it can be said that prima facie there is sufficient evidence about the involvement of the accused. Thus, cognizance of offense under Section 3 of the PMLA, punishable under Section 4, is taken. Accused No. 1 (Satyendra Jain), 5 (Vaibhav Jain) and 6 (Ankush Jain) are already in custody, while accused No. 1 has joined through VC (Video Conference), accused No. 5 and 6 JC (Judicial) (Custody) Documents to be supplied to them.”
Special judge Geetanjali Goel summoned all the accused, who were not in custody, including the four companies, to appear before the court on August 6 when the matter is fixed for framing of charges and trial. The court also granted interim bail to the accused Ajit Kumar Jain and Sunil Kumar Jain on a surety of Rs one lakh.
The court also issued summons to the minister’s wife Poonam Jain for August 6 as she was not present in the court.
This development will put pressure on Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal to sack his cabinet colleague. The CM has so far refused to remove Jain saying that he has examined the papers and found that Jain has not done anything wrong.
Jain, who was arrested on May 30 and denied bail, is admitted to LNJP Hospital as he claimed to be unwell. In a setback to him, the Delhi High Court on Thursday said his bail application should not be decided on the basis of the report of the Delhi government-controlled LNJP Hospital.
The ED chargesheet has accused the minister of sending his black money through shell companies in Kolkata to another group of shell companies formed here to buy land in the national capital.
“The accused Satyendra Kumar Jain and his family members exercised control and had substantial stake in some companies, such as Paryas Infosolution Pvt Ltd, Indo Metalimpex Pvt Ltd, Akinchan Developers Pvt Ltd and Mangalayatan Projects Pvt Ltd, and these companies also included 16.38 crore in money laundering,” the special court said while allowing framing of charges.
In its prosecution complaint (chargesheet), the ED claimed that “during 2015-16, when Satyendar Jain was a public servant, Rs 4.81 crore was received from shell companies against cash transfers to four companies (owned and controlled by him). Received accommodation entries of. Kolkata based entry operators through hawala route.”
The court also referred to the statements recorded by the ED under section 50 PMLA of Jain’s co-accused, which were allegedly used by them to transfer the alleged proceeds of the offense to mislead the investigation.
The court said, “The agricultural land purchased with the amount received as housing entries against cash in Mangalayatan Projects Pvt Ltd was transferred in the names of Swati Jain, Sushila Jain and Indu Jain to evade the proceeds of the offense ” Even the payment for the purchase of land was not made through the check mentioned in the registration deed, according to the chargesheet, a serious allegation of misrepresentation and forgery.
Identifying Jain as the main accused or ‘A-1’, the chargesheet states that it was Jain who had scripted the entire money laundering operation to purchase land through benami transactions. “The companies in question were beneficially owned and controlled by accused A-1 (Satyendra Jain) and the idea of housing entries was the brainchild of A-1, major decisions in the company were taken by A-1 and there was a plan for laundering. Chargesheet It states that the concept and implementation of proceeds of offense was done by A-1.
During the hearing, the court pulled up the ED for wrongly including Jain’s name in the chargesheet with the accused companies and said he was neither a director of the company nor associated with them.
“He (Jain) was neither a director nor associated with him. How will companies become Satyendar Jain’s by just taking his name? Is this the first time that you are filing a prosecution complaint? Do you have documents before giving it? In court. Should I do a messy investigation based on these papers? Do you think the IO can give whatever it wants? Jain doesn’t become a director just because you wrote it, “The judge told the ED’s special public prosecutor.
The court further observed that half of the documents mentioned in the chargesheet were photocopies. The judge remarked, “It will not be proved. Does ED work like this? I don’t know where is the stage of correction.”
Additional Solicitor General ASV Raju told the court that he would file a revised memorandum of the accused.
The ED had arrested Jain on May 30 and remanded him to 14-day judicial custody at the end of his custodial interrogation on June 13. The agency had alleged that Jain had served and served as a minister in the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi during the period February 14, 2015 to May 31, 2017, during the period from February 14, 2015 to May 31, 2017. had acquired property in his name in the form of movable and immovable properties. and in the name of members of his family, who were not in proportion to his “known sources of income”.
The CBI has already filed a charge sheet against the minister for “disproportionate income” under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The ED case is based on the 2017 CBI FIR.