What TV doesn't, print can't; we deliver.
What TV doesn't, print can't; we deliver.
NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Friday took cognizance of the charge sheet filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against arrested Delhi Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyendar Jain, his wife and eight others including four firms in connection with the hawala transactions money laundering case.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Wednesday filed a prosecution complaint (charge sheet) naming Delhi Minister Satyender Jain and others in a money laundering case.
The ED has named Satyender Jain, his wife Poonam Jain, Vaibhav Jain, Ankush Jain, Ajit Prasad Jain and Sunil Jain including four private firms as accused under the sections for violations of the money laundering Act.
The ED said that its case is based on the FIR registered by CBI against the accused persons on August 24, 2017.
The ED said that as per the allegations in the said FIR, Jain, while posted and functioning as a Minister in Delhi government had acquired assets disproportionate to his known sources of income to the tune of ₹1.62 crores during the period from February 14, 2015, to May 31, 2017, with the help of other persons and his family members namely his wife Poonam Jain, Ajit Prasad Jain, Sunil Kumar Jain, Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain.
It said that Jain and his family members exercised control and or had a substantial stake or shareholding in certain companies – Paryas Infosolution Pvt. Ltd., Indo Metalimpex Pvt. Ltd., Akinchan Developers Pvt. Ltd. and Mangalayatan Projects Pvt. Ltd and these companies are also found to be involved in the laundering of money amounting to ₹16.38 crores.
It said that Jain was one of the Directors in three of the said companies except Mangalayatan Projects Pvt. Ltd. before becoming a Cabinet Minister in the Delhi government.
The ED alleged that the money was given in cash to some Kolkata-based entry operators of different shell companies by Jain through his employee or associates, for providing accommodation entries instead of cash.
“The said Kolkata-based entry operators re-routed the money so received from Jain, by investing in the companies beneficially owned and controlled by the AAP leader by purchasing shares of the four companies,” the ED alleged.
It also said that the shares were purchased from the companies after layering the cash received from accused Jain through several shell companies.
“The money received back from the entry operators, in the form of share capital in these companies, was further used for purchasing agricultural land in Delhi,” the ED alleged.
The ED also alleged that Jain had control over the four companies either in the form of being one of the Directors of these companies and or on account of holding one-third of shares of these companies in his name or in the name of his family members/relatives/friends etc. and out of total ₹16.38 crore, ₹2.02 crores, ₹69 lakh and ₹1.9 crores totalling to ₹ 4.61 crores had been routed as accommodation entries into Akinchan Developers Pvt. Ltd., Paryas Infosolution Pvt. Ltd and Mangalayatan Projects Pvt. Ltd. respectively from the Kolkata-based operators during the period from August 1, 2015, to March 16, 2016, during the period when the AAP leader was a Minister in Delhi government.
The ED further stated that the agricultural land purchased with the amount received as accommodation entries against cash in Manglayatan Projects Pvt. Ltd. was transferred in the name of Swati Jain, Sushila Jain and Indu Jain to frustrate the proceeds of crime and even the payment for the purchase of land had not been made through the cheques mentioned in the registration deeds.
The ED said that the companies in question were beneficially owned and controlled by the AAP leader and the idea of accommodation entries was his brainchild. It also noted that major decisions in the company were taken by him and the scheme of laundering of proceeds of crime was conceptualized and executed by Jain himself.
The ED said that in its declaration Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain under the Income Disclosure Scheme of 2016 and that request was made by the Delhi Minister for adjusting his tax liability from the tax deposited by them, which it is alleged provide a clear evidence of the fact that the accommodation entries declaration in IDS, as well as the whole process of accommodation entries, was carried out on the directions and at the behest of the AAP leader.
It is submitted that the facts lead to an inevitable conclusion that the present case is a classic case of Money Laundering involving meticulous planning and execution at all three stages of placement, layering and integration of the proceeds of crime generated by the AAP leader and his associates.
The ED also alleged that the cash amounts were transferred through CA via hawala operators to Kolkata to entry operators for layering of the cash transactions. “Thereafter the entry operators knowingly and intentionally layered the cash in different shell companies’ bank accounts and finally transferred the said amounts to Companies of Jain for final integration in the mainstream financial system for further claiming/ projecting the same as clean untainted money.
The ED further alleged that Jain and his companies or associates used the said money for purchasing agricultural lands and the said properties/ agricultural lands, acquired out of the proceeds of crime generated through the commission of scheduled offences are now being claimed projected as being of clean or untainted origins.
It is stated that the audited books were signed by the CA appointed by Jain and the CA despite having complete knowledge of the activities knowingly audited and signed the books.
“It is stated that it was therefore abundantly clear that Jain masterminded the entire operations and executed the accommodation entries against cash with full preparation and with a guilty mind,” the ED alleged.
Special judge Geetanjali Goel on Friday while taking cognizance of the prosecution complaint, also summoned all the accused who were not in custody, including four companies and posted the matter for hearing on August 6.
