What TV doesn't, print can't; we deliver.
What TV doesn't, print can't; we deliver.
In yet another setback for arrested Delhi minister Satyendar Jain, a local court on Thursday rejected his bail plea in connection with a money laundering case involving hawala transactions with Kolkata-based companies.
It was the second rejection of the AAP leader’s bail application by the court, with the first one being filed in June earlier this year.
Besides the minister, it also rejected the bail plea of co-accused Ankush Jain and Vaibhav Jain.
He was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on May 30 in the case which was registered based on an FIR registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in August 2017.
While opposing Jain’s bail application, the agency accused him of misleading it and being non-cooperative in course of the investigation.
Jain, who is in charge of the health department, is currently lodged in Delhi’s Tihar jail which has been in controversy in the recent past.
Earlier this week, the superintendent of the Tihar jail was suspended for extending preferential treatment to the minister. He has also been accused of demanding protection money from another inmate, Sukesh Chandrasekhar who is lodged in a ₹200 crores extortion case.
During the hearing, the ED also alleged VIP treatment to Jain inside the jail and submitted CCTV camera footage in the court to support its claims. The agency said that the AAP leader enjoyed luxuries inside the jail and accused him of influencing the investigation by regularly meeting the co-accused in the case.
The financial probe agency also alleged that Jain’s wife Poonam Jain was a frequent visitor to his cell, which is against jail rules.
On July 30 this year, the court had taken cognizance of the ED charge sheet against Jain, his wife and eight others, including four firms in connection with the hawala transactions.
Along with minister Jain, his wife Poonam, Vaibhav Jain, Ankush Jain, Ajit Prasad Jain and Sunil Jain including four private firms are named as accused under the money laundering act.
It had filed a prosecution complaint (charge sheet) naming the Delhi minister and others.
