A single-judge bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma reserved orders in the matter after hearing arguments from both sides. (Express Photo)The Delhi High Court Friday reserved its verdict in the bail plea of Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP) communications incharge Vijay Nair in Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) probe into the now-scrapped excise policy.
A single-judge bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma reserved orders in the matter after hearing arguments from both sides.
The ED has alleged that Nair received kickbacks to the tune of Rs 100 crore from South group. The kickbacks were facilitated by Hyderabad-based businessman Abhishek Boinpally in connivance with Nair and his associate, Dinesh Arora, ED further alleged. The agency claimed that Arora handled Rs 30 crore in connivance with Boinpally, and an amount of Rs 1 crore under Nair’s instructions.
On Friday, appearing for the ED, additional solicitor general SV Raju argued, “All those persons who were dealing with AAP’s advertisements and hoarding for the Goa elections, their statements are there…majority of the money was paid to them in cash. Ultimately, Vijay Nair is the face of the AAP…he was the instrument in collecting (the money)…the collection went for election.”
When asked by the court if any of the money had been recovered, Raju said, “Sometimes, even if the dead body is not recovered in a case of murder, the person is convicted for murder.”
In her rejoinder arguments, senior advocate Rebecca John, appearing for Nair, said, “Today my learned friend has read some Goa statements that 58 Lakhs, 10 Lakhs…were given to vendors for advertisements…Is this the case for which I’m in custody for so long? Let us look at it from the laundering point of view. The reason to keep me in custody is that I have demanded 100 crores. Their best witness, Dinesh Arora…has not handled the money. We can keep talking about peripheral evidence to prejudice the minds of everybody but the Enforcement Directorate is meant to trace out proceeds of crime, calculate and show how this 100 crore was paid, by whom, at what time and collected by whom…” She further said, “Without this Rs 100 crore, there is no case against Nair to justify his continued incarceration. I’m not asking that the matter be quashed. I’m only saying that he will face trial.”
Arora had turned an approver in the CBI probe into the excise policy case.
Submitting that in a money laundering case “the fulcrum is the money”, John said, “If you don’t find the money then none of us deserve to be in court. By found I don’t mean recovery; I mean a coherent analysis and statement that this much on this date reached this person. That is absolutely missing here.