Read Time: 09 minutes

The Delhi High Court on Thursday granted bail to RJD MP Amarendra Dhari Singh in case registered by the Enforcement Directorate in the Fertilizer Scam.

The order was passed by a single judge bench of Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar in a bail plea  filed by Singh in connection with  a CBI case registered on May 14, 2021 under  U/s 120B, 420 IPC and Sec. 13(1)(d) r/w Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988  against him and other accused persons.

At that time Singh was a Senior Vice President of M/s Jyoti Trading Corporation. It is alleged that Singh  entered into a criminal conspiracy during 2007 to 2014 and cheated and defrauded IFFCO and Indian Potash Limited. (IPL), the share holders of those entities and the Government of India by fraudulently importing fertilizers and other materials for fertilizer production at inflated prices and claimed higher subsidy from Government of India causing loss of several crores of rupees. They allegedly siphoned off the commission received from the suppliers through a complex web of fake commercial transactions through multiple companies owned by the accused persons, registered outside India in order to camouflage the fraudulent transactions.

It is claimed that Singh acted as intermediary along with other accused for channelizing the ill gotten money through different firms and companies. It is claimed that in this manner, Rs. 685 Crores approximately were received in the bank accounts of the group companies and individual account of Singh and other co accused in the case.

Arguing on Singh’s bail application Counsel appearing for the MP submitted  that there is not even an iota of allegation by the ED that the petitioner misused his position as a member of the Standing Committee of Fertilizers.

It was further submitted  the petitioner had travelled overseas approximately 90 times since the receipt of first notice in FEMA enquiry on March 3, 2011 and has duly returned to   country despite pendency of various enquiries and investigation so by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the petitioner is a flight risk.

 It was also submitted that  simply because the petitioner is a Member of Parliament or a Member of Standing Committee of Fertilizers, it does not disentitle him to any relief from this Court as no misconduct has been attributed to him. It was  further argued that the position of the petitioner in the society shows that he has deep roots and there are no chances of his running away.

ASG Raju appearing for ED referring to a number of cases of the Supreme Court argued that  economic offences constituted a class apart and needed to be visited with a different approach.

The Court however referring to  the Supreme Court judgement in  P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement (2020) 13 SCC 791 observed that even if the allegation was one of grave economic offence, it was not a rule that bail should be denied in every case.

Regarding the flight risk, the Court observed that  it is the admitted case of the department that over the period of last 10 years the petitioner has gone abroad atleast 90 times for various purposes.

As the medical condition of the petitioner is concerned, the Court observed that  he is suffering from cancer since 2002 which is not denied by the department. The petitioner is under the treatment of one doctor namely Morton Coleman of U.S. and he visits the doctor for his follow up from time to time. It is on record that the petitioner was granted special permission to travel to America by the American Embassy aided by the Ministry of External Affairs and his sister was also allowed to travel with him due to his medical condition.

The Court further noted that “No doubt, as argued by the Ld. ASG, the condition of the petitioner is not serious and do not require immediate attention and his present condition is manageable, but one also cannot lose sight of the fact that the petitioner is a known case of cancer and is suffering from various   aforementioned diseases for which he is taking medicines as submitted by Ld. Sr. counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is in J.C. since 02.06.2021. Therefore, in view of the entire facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion, that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail on merits as well as on medical grounds.”

The Court has allowing bail has directed Singh to furnish a personal bond of Rs 10,000 with surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

Case Title: Amarendra Dhari Singh vs Directorate of Enforcement