Supertech promoter granted bail in Rs 700cr PMLA case

New Delhi: The Patiala House Court in Delhi has granted regular bail to, chairman and promoter of Supertech, in connection with a Rs 700 crore prevention of money laundering case.

Arora, who was arrested in June last year and was released on a Rs one lakh personal bond and two sureties of the same amount.

ALSO READ: AAP to contest 2025 Assembly election in Delhi alone

The bail was granted by Additional Sessions Judge Devender Kumar Jangala.

The defense team included Advocates Tanveer Ahmed Mir, Yash Dutt, Kartik Venu, Shashwat Sarin, Aaraiana Ahluwalia, and Vaibhav Suri presented the case before the court.

Speaking with The New Indian Advocate Tanvir Ahmed Mir said that his client Arora has delivered thousands of projects but a few projects couldn’t be delivered on time due to some reasons. This led the investors to lodge complaints against the Supertech.

“There were 26 FIRs out of which a few were quashed. The ED case is based on these FIRs. They have also filed a chargesheet against my client. We moved bail application and the court has allowed our plea,” Said Mr Mir.

According to the Enforcement Directorate as many as 26 FIRs were lodged by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Delhi Police, as well as by the Haryana and UP Police, against Supertech Limited and its affiliated companies.

These FIRs, filed under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) in conjunction with 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating), 467, and 471 of the IPC, allege that Supertech cheated at least 670 homebuyers out of Rs 164 crore.

The ED also claims that the funds collected by Supertech Ltd. were redirected to their group companies for purchasing properties, often of significantly lower value than the amount collected.

The Enforcement Directorate has accused the individuals involved of acquiring properties and making illegal gains from the proceeds of crime by engaging in criminal activities associated with scheduled offenses. According to the ED, there is a prima facie case indicating violations under Section 3, punishable by Section 4, of the PMLA Act.