Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

In the bail hearing of Hyderabad-business man and accused in the Delhi excise policy case Abhishek Boinpally on Monday, senior counsel representing him told the Delhi High Court that, “There is no material, no proof. All based on assumptions. I have no criminal antecedents. I am not a flight risk”.

Senior Advocate Vikram Chaudhari, on behalf of Boinpally, stated that while in the custody of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), on the day Boinpally was granted bail, the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) arrested him.

Chaudhari contended, “Prima Facie I have a sanguine case to argue. The accusations against me are prima facie hollow. The first & principal allegation against me (Abhishek Boinpally) is that I am a key person involved in the conspiracy and got kickbacks of Rs. 100 crores. This is on the basis of the statement of one Dinesh Arora (an approver in the CBI case). Assuming his statement is of some credibility, this is a statement of a person who has been given assurance of non-prosecution, non-arrest”.

Stating the second allegation Chaudhari contended, “The allegation was that Rs. 3.85 crores traveled from Indospirits to one Gautam Mootha, one of my good acquaintances on February 10, 2022, then to me and from me to Zeus network private network which was kind of a news network. This is the trial according to the ED. This is only on paper but what they are ignoring is two facts”.

The senior counsel argued that ED has completely ignored two facts. “In February and March 2021, I (Abhishek Boinpally) invest in Zeus Network, on Oct 6, 2021, I am made a shareholding director. As of today, I am a 99% shareholder. I became the Director much before Rs. 3.58 crores came into my account as per ED.”

He argued, “On October 19, 2020, I (Abhishek Boinpally) paid Mr. Gautam Mootha, Rs. 50 lakhs, which he paid me back. Then from November 2020 to November 2021, I gave him Rs. 6.53 crore. Is it bad to do business?”

Citing a famous fallacy "Post Hoc ergo propter hoc", which means after this, therefore because of this, "the entire case is ipse dixit (without proof)", argued Choudhari.

Additionally, pointing out the “fallacy” in the ED’s case, he argued, “The fallacy is that this Rs 3.85 crore came to me from Mootha so they assumed that it must have been proceeds of crime without disclosing to the court that he (Boinpally) had already paid Rs 6.53 crore to Mootha and balance was left”.

“I have no antecedents, I have no past. I am a man with deep roots. My father abandoned (me) a long time back. I have been raised by a single mother. She is old. I have a wife and a minor child. This is my family. I am always available. I’m not a flight risk…There is a serious debatable issue that could be thrashed at the time of the trial. I have a sanguine case to bring all this in evidence and demonstrate”, the senior counsel concluded.

Taking note of the submissions, Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma posted the matter for hearing submissions of ED on May 15, 2023 at 2:30 pm.

Boinpally was a Director of Anoos Electrolysis & Obesity Pvt. Ltd, Anoos Health & Wellness Pvt. Ltd., Robin Distribution LLP, Agasti Ventures, SS Mines & Minerals, Master Sand LLP, Neoverse Realty Pvt. Ltd., Zeus Networking Pvt. Ltd and Valuecare Esthetic Pvt. Ltd.

Notably, on March 14, Boinpally moved the Delhi High Court challenging the trial court’s order denying him bail in a case registered by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED).

It is to be noted that on February 16, the Special Judge MK Nagpal of the Rouse Avenue Court, Delhi denied bail to Abhishek Boinpally, Vijay Nair, Sameer Mahendru, Sarath P Reddy and Binoy Babu. All of them were arrested by ED in the money laundering case related to the Delhi liquor scam.

Case Title: Abhishek Boinpally v. Directorate of Enforcement