A Delhi court Thursday denied bail to AAP leader Satyendar Jain in connection with an alleged money laundering case being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). Special Judge Vikas Dhull at Rouse Avenue court observed that it “has prima facie come on record that Jain was actually involved in concealing proceeds of crime by giving cash to Kolkata-based entry operators, and bringing the cash into three companies”. “By this process, the proceeds of crime to the tune of 1/3rd of Rs 4.61 crore has been laundered. Apart from that, Satyendar Kumar Jain has also used the same modus operandi to convert his proceeds of crime of Rs 15,00,000 by receiving accommodation entries from Kolkata-based entry operators. The applicant/accused had knowingly done such activity to obliterate the tracing of the source of ill-gotten money and, accordingly, the proceeds of crime was layered through Kolkata- based entry operators in a way that its source was difficult to decipher,” the court said. The court said Jain “has prima facie indulged in the offence of money laundering of more than Rs 1 crore”. The court had also denied bail to two other accused persons, Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain. Jain’s lawyer, senior advocate N Hariharan, had argued that Jain was not the owner of the companies under investigation, however, the court said this was not germane for calculating the proceeds of crime or for finding out Jain’s involvement in money laundering. “The money which had come into the account of three companies during the check period was not the income of the companies arising from any lawful business but in reality the same was the accommodation entries obtained by applicant/accused Satyendar Jain and other co-accused by providing cash to Kolkata-based entry operators,” it said. On the defence lawyer’s contentions that the ED had calculated proceeds of crime using notional values, the court said the amount of Rs 4.61 crore provided by Jain is “not notional or assumptive but has been established on record” by the statement of the ED’s star witness. The court said Jain and the co-accused adopted a process where “proceeds of crime and unaccounted cash was converted into the income of the companies and shares of co-accused Ankush and Vaibhav. with an intention of concealment of proceeds of crime”. Hariharan had also argued that the CBI has not chargesheeted M JJ Ideal Estate Pvt Ltd and even has not taken Rs 15,00,000 as part of disproportionate assets but the chargesheet reveals the role of M JJ Ideal Estate Pvt Ltd and Rs 15,00,000 having received as accommodation entries. On this, the court said it is not bound by the chargesheet filed by the investigating agency and “if there is material on record to show that amount of Rs 15,00,000 is also disproportionate assets and there are more additional accused who are required to be summoned, then court can very well take notice of the said fact and can summon the additional accused and can frame the charge accordingly”. The CBI had filed a case in August 2017 under the Prevention of Corruption Act and a year later filed a chargesheet against Jain, his wife, and four of his associates in the disproportionate assets case. Following this case, the ED had provisionally attached immovable properties worth Rs 4.81 crore belonging to Akinchan Developers Pvt Ltd, Indo Metal Impex Pvt Ltd, Paryas Infosolutions Pvt Ltd, Manglayatan Projects Pvt Ltd, and JJ Ideal Estate Pvt Ltd. The ED has alleged Jain “beneficially owned and controlled” the above-mentioned companies during the period 2015-16 when he was a public servant and “received accommodation entries to the tune of Rs 4.81 crore from shell companies against cash transferred to Kolkata-based entry operators through the hawala route”.
