Delhi court denies bail for all 5 accused in Liquor Scam case
17 Feb 2023 11:11:13
New Delhi, Feb 17: A city court today dismissed the bail applications of five accused in a Delhi excise policy-related money laundering case, noting it was not possible to hold they will make no attempt to tamper with the evidence if released.
Special Judge M K Nagpal denied the relief to Vijay Nair, Sameer Mahendru, Sharath Reddy, Abhishek Boinpally, and Benoy Babu, saying that further investigation, including the role of other persons involved in the commission of alleged offenses and to trace the complete trail of ill-gotten money, was still pending.
"Keeping in view their (accused) conduct as reflected on record it will not be possible for this court to hold that they will make no attempt to tamper with the evidence of this case in case they are permanently released on bail as serious allegations of tampering with evidence by way of destruction or change of their mobile phones various times have already been made by the ED against them. "And further even the specific allegations of destruction of digital data have also been leveled against the accused Reddy," the judge said. The court said the fact that the accused were involved in a case of economic offense could not be "totally ignored as the economic offenses have been held to be constituting a class apart as the same tends to destroy the economic fabric of the nation". Further, the above fact assumes more importance when the accused is found to be involved in a case of money laundering as the Prevention of Money Laundering Act imposes certain restrictions on the powers of the court to release an accused on bail in such a case, the judge said. The court further rejected the argument made by Reddy and Babu that they are not accused in the scheduled offenses case of CBI, terming it "without any merits". The judge said the oral and documentary evidence brought on record by the ED was enough to infer the existence of a criminal conspiracy between the accused. The judge observed that apart from the statements of the accused and witnesses, documentary evidence, including WhatsApp chats, cell phone locations, records of bank transactions relating to transfer, etc. proceeds of crime, hotel meetings held between the accused at different places, and some digital data and other records of the entities belonging to the accused persons, were also on record. Besides, the statement of approver Dinesh Arora in the corruption case being probed by the CBI was another piece of incriminating evidence throwing light upon the entire modus-operandi adopted by the accused persons, and his statement to some extent "tends to corroborate the other oral and documentary evidence which have been collected and placed on record by the investigating agency". The judge observed that though the individual proceeds of crime being attributed to the accused persons were shown by the ED on a much higher side and even the amount of losses allegedly suffered by the government exchequer was said to be highly exaggerated and a major part thereof may not be attributable to the conduct of accused persons, "the same cannot be made a ground to enlarge the applicants on bail".
The court said serious allegations have been leveled against them of being part of a criminal conspiracy to bribe public servants in politics or otherwise and holding different offices and positions in Delhi for causing undue advantages or favors to certain persons in the liquor lobby against the payment of huge kickbacks in advance.
"Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances and the above discussion, this court is of the considered opinion that none of the applicants/accused deserves to be released on bail in this case at this stage of proceedings as the allegations made against them are quite serious and relate to the commission of an economic offense of money-laundering defined by Section 3 and made punishable by Section 4 of the PMLA. Hence, their bail applications are being dismissed," the judge said. Regarding the role of Vijay Nair, the court observed there was prima facie evidence to show he had emerged as the "sutradhar" (one who holds the strings in a play) of the entire criminal conspiracy that came into existence between various accused persons, some of whom are yet to be identified, in connection with formulation and implementation of the above excise policy.