The Bombay High Court on Tuesday resumed hearing in the bail application filed by Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader Anil Deshmukh in money laundering case..The hearing before single-judge resumed after the Supreme Court on Monday directed the High Court to take up the matter this week and dispose it of expeditiously. Deshmukh and his associates are being investigated for alleged corruption and consequent laundering of those proceeds between 2019 and 2021.Deshmukh filed for regular bail before the High Court in March 2022 after a special PMLA Court rejected his bail plea. In April 2022, ED filed its reply claiming Deshmukh had not been able to explain the source of huge wealth and proceeds of crimeDuring the 8 month pendency, Justices Revati Mohite Dere, PD Naik, Bharati Dangre and Prithviraj K Chavan of Bombay High Court recused themselves from hearing the former minister's bail application.During the hearing today before single-judge Justice NJ Jamadar, Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhari and advocate Aniket Nikam appearing for Deshmukh, pointed out that the former minister has already spent 11 months in prison and the trial would take a long time. Chaudhari contended that the maximum punishment for the offences charged against Deshmukh is 7 years and minimum punishment is 3 months and that Deshmukh had already undergone more than the minimum punishment. Chaudhari pointed out that the allegations pertained to the conduct of Deshmukh, which formed part of the case being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).“The entire accusation against me is on my conduct. Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) looks into conduct, and hence they will investigate into corruption charges but laundering is with ED,” Chaudhari submitted..The role alleged against Deshmukh was that he had obtained undue advantage and illegal gratification to the tune of ₹4.7 crores.Chaudhari argued that the allegation that Deshmukh laundered money was entirely based on statements of witnesses which were questionable.He added that the original case was supposed to involve ₹100 crores; however, as per claims ED’s case was brought down to ₹4.75 crores..Chaudhari contended that the issues in this case were extremely grey and the trial will be long. “Like I said, it is not an open and shut case there is more than what meets the eye. The Court must consider this bail from a holistic angle and the applicant has no past antecedents why should he suffer even a day more in jail?” Chaudhari argued..A major portion of the evidence related to statements recorded by dismissed Mumbai cop Sachin Waze, who had been made witness in CBI's case. Chaudhari argued that those statements lacked credibility. He referred to the submission made by Waze before the Chandiwal Commission constituted by the Maharashtra government judicial enquiry into the allegations levelled by former Mumbai Police Commissioner Param Bir Singh against Deshmukh.“He said he was forced to sign various documents under duress. How is ED more credible? Was he under duress before ED or before the Commission? His statements lack credibility. There is a lot to be argued during trial,” said Chaudhari..The hearing will continue tomorrow when Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh will make submissions on behalf ED.
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday resumed hearing in the bail application filed by Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader Anil Deshmukh in money laundering case..The hearing before single-judge resumed after the Supreme Court on Monday directed the High Court to take up the matter this week and dispose it of expeditiously. Deshmukh and his associates are being investigated for alleged corruption and consequent laundering of those proceeds between 2019 and 2021.Deshmukh filed for regular bail before the High Court in March 2022 after a special PMLA Court rejected his bail plea. In April 2022, ED filed its reply claiming Deshmukh had not been able to explain the source of huge wealth and proceeds of crimeDuring the 8 month pendency, Justices Revati Mohite Dere, PD Naik, Bharati Dangre and Prithviraj K Chavan of Bombay High Court recused themselves from hearing the former minister's bail application.During the hearing today before single-judge Justice NJ Jamadar, Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhari and advocate Aniket Nikam appearing for Deshmukh, pointed out that the former minister has already spent 11 months in prison and the trial would take a long time. Chaudhari contended that the maximum punishment for the offences charged against Deshmukh is 7 years and minimum punishment is 3 months and that Deshmukh had already undergone more than the minimum punishment. Chaudhari pointed out that the allegations pertained to the conduct of Deshmukh, which formed part of the case being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).“The entire accusation against me is on my conduct. Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) looks into conduct, and hence they will investigate into corruption charges but laundering is with ED,” Chaudhari submitted..The role alleged against Deshmukh was that he had obtained undue advantage and illegal gratification to the tune of ₹4.7 crores.Chaudhari argued that the allegation that Deshmukh laundered money was entirely based on statements of witnesses which were questionable.He added that the original case was supposed to involve ₹100 crores; however, as per claims ED’s case was brought down to ₹4.75 crores..Chaudhari contended that the issues in this case were extremely grey and the trial will be long. “Like I said, it is not an open and shut case there is more than what meets the eye. The Court must consider this bail from a holistic angle and the applicant has no past antecedents why should he suffer even a day more in jail?” Chaudhari argued..A major portion of the evidence related to statements recorded by dismissed Mumbai cop Sachin Waze, who had been made witness in CBI's case. Chaudhari argued that those statements lacked credibility. He referred to the submission made by Waze before the Chandiwal Commission constituted by the Maharashtra government judicial enquiry into the allegations levelled by former Mumbai Police Commissioner Param Bir Singh against Deshmukh.“He said he was forced to sign various documents under duress. How is ED more credible? Was he under duress before ED or before the Commission? His statements lack credibility. There is a lot to be argued during trial,” said Chaudhari..The hearing will continue tomorrow when Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh will make submissions on behalf ED.
