Delhi HC Reserves Verdict in Sanjay Bhandari’s Plea Against ‘Fugitive Economic Offender’ Tag

The Delhi High Court on Thursday, 21 August, reserved its verdict on a plea filed by UK-based arms consultant Sanjay Bhandari challenging a trial court order that had declared him a “fugitive economic offender.”

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna reserved the order after hearing submissions on behalf of the Enforcement Directorate (ED), represented by Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju and Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain, as well as Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for Bhandari.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Bhandari, referred to a letter of the Income Tax Department addressed to the Enforcement Directorate. He submitted that while the letter mentions an amount of more than Rs 100 crore, the assessment itself is yet to be completed, and, at this stage, there was no material in the Department’s possession.

“The consequence of such an action is set out in Section 14 of the Act. It states that I cannot defend myself in civil proceedings, I cannot file a writ petition, I cannot institute a case, and I cannot contest any matter — all this before the tax is even finalised. Therefore, the order of the trial court ought to be stayed,” Sibal argued.

However, Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain, appearing for the ED, opposed the submissions, contending that the sole purpose of the Act is to ensure that the person returns and faces the law. The ED further sought permission to file written submissions in response to the arguments by the senior counsel.

Noting that written submissions had already been filed, the Court proceeded to reserve its judgment.

On 8 August, the ED opposed Sanjay Bhandari’s challenge to a trial court order that had declared him a fugitive economic offender.

The Court had also called for the trial court’s order sheet to confirm that the non-bailable warrant (NBW) issued against Bhandari had not been cancelled.

Appearing for Bhandari, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that the ED’s prosecution was premature, as the tax assessment proceedings had not yet been completed. Without a final assessment, he contended, there could be no certainty that the alleged tax evasion crossed the statutory threshold of Rs 100 crore.

In response, Additional Solicitor General S. V. Raju submitted that when the trial court passed its order, it had before it an assessment order indicating that properties worth Rs 655 crore had been unlawfully acquired.

Special Counsel Zoheb Hussain, also appearing for the ED, added that under Section 51 of the Fugitive Economic Offenders (FEO) Act, 2018, a completed assessment order is not a prerequisite for initiating prosecution. The law itself, he argued, makes it clear that even an attempt is punishable, and therefore the absence of a final assessment does not impede the ED’s power to prosecute.

Earlier, Justice Girish Kathpalia had recused himself from hearing Bhandari’s plea. The judge had then listed the matter for arguments on the maintainability of the plea and transferred it to another bench after hearing submissions from Bhandari’s counsel as well as the ED,

Notably, the Delhi Court had declared Bhandari a fugitive economic offender on a plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate.

In his order, District Judge (Tis Hazari) Sanjeev Aggarwal observed,“The court is satisfied that Sh. Sanjay Bhandari, S/o Late Sh. R.K. Bhandari, is a fugitive economic offender under Section 12(1) of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018, and is declared as such under the aforesaid provision(s) of the said Act.”

Noting that the extradition attempt might have failed, the court said that this “will not make the accused an angel or immune from prosecution for violating Indian laws.”

In a detailed 100-page judgment, the court observed,“The FEO proceedings are another way of making one come back to India to face trial by coercing him to return by attachment and confiscation of the properties of such a fugitive economic offender and proceeds of crime, and by disentitling such a fugitive economic offender from putting forward or defending any civil claim.”

Sanjay Bhandari, aged 63, fled to London after the Income Tax Department, in 2017, filed a chargesheet under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) Act, 2015, alleging that he had concealed foreign assets and failed to disclose them to Indian tax authorities.

Taking cognisance of the I-T Department’s chargesheet, the ED initiated a criminal case against him and others for money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The agency later attached Bhandari’s assets worth Rs. 21 crore under the PMLA. In 2020, the ED filed its first chargesheet against him.

The agency has also been probing Bhandari’s links with Robert Vadra, the businessman husband of Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra.

Following this, in 2023, the ED filed a supplementary chargesheet in the case, alleging that Bhandari “acquired” the 12, Bryanston Square house located in London in 2009 and got it renovated “as per the directions of Robert Vadra, and the funds for renovation were provided by Robert Vadra.”

Case Title: Sanjay Bhandari vs Enforcement Directorate

Hearing Date : 21 August 2025

Bench: Justice Neena Bansal Krishna