New Delhi: The Rose Avenue Court on Thursday denied the bail petition of Satyendar Jain in connection with the money laundering case being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
According to reports, the court said that “the applicant or accused Satyendar Kumar Jain has prima facie indulged in the offence of money laundering of more than Rs 1 crore.”
The Special Judge Vikas Dhull on Thursday dismissed the bail petitions of Satyendar Jain and two others and said that the Supreme Court has held that “the economic offences have deep-rooted conspiracies and involve a huge loss of public funds that need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing a serious threat to the financial health of the country.”
Hence, the accused Satyender Kumar Jain is not entitled to the benefit of bail having regard to the twin conditions provided in Section 45 of the PMLA. The application of the accused Satyender Kumar Jain is dismissed, the court said.
During arguments, ASG for ED submitted that there are witnesses and materials sufficient to make out a case of money laundering against the accused. ASG submitted that the accused was involved in money laundering with other accused. He sent money to Kolkata-based companies and that money belonged to Jain. He is the conspirator and kingpin.
ED had also raised the issue of special treatment given to Satyendar Jain in the Tihar Jail. Special food is being provided to him and he is getting massages from unknown people. Most of the time, he is either in the hospital or in jail enjoying these facilities, said the ED.
The enforcement agency has alleged that the companies which were “beneficially owned and controlled” by Jain had received accommodation entries amounting to Rs 4.81 crore from the shell companies against cash transferred to Kolkata-based entry operators through a hawala route.
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.
Click here for Latest News updates and viral videos on our AI-powered smart news
For viral videos and Latest trends subscribe to NewsMobile YouTube Channel and Follow us on Instagram