Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

While the Enforcement Directorate opposed the interim bail granted to Rajesh Katyal, the Delhi High Court on Monday (November 4) permitted him to file his reply within 24 hours on a plea moved by ED challenging the said interim bail in a money laundering case.

Rajesh Katyal was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for allegedly laundering more than Rs 200 crore in proceeds of crime (POC) through his companies.

The bench, presided over by Justice Chandra Dhari Singh while hearing the plea moved by ED, granted  Rajesh Katyal 24 hours to file his reply in the instant matter, noting that the same matter is listed before the trial court and high court, respectively, for tomorrow.

At the outset, Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa, appearing for (petitioner) Rajesh Katyal, contended before the bench that the FIR concerning the case dates back to 2013 and was quashed many years ago. Arguing in favor of the interim bail granted by the trial court, Pahwa pointed out that the said bail was granted after considering the entirety of the matter, which includes evidence and material on record. He further claimed that the interim bail was granted on the ground that no predicate offence was made out.

In essence, Pahwa argued that there exists concealment of facts and that ED is misusing the process of law. He pressed for liberty and stated that the same shouldn't be taken away without providing the accused with a proper opportunity to be heard.

"The moment my lordship stays the order, my friend will say this order is not sustainable, and thereby my entire case will get prejudiced; ED is trying to put pressure on the trial court," he added.

Opposing the interim bail, Special Public Prosecutor Zoheb Hossain, appearing for the Enforcement Directorate, cited the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Parvinder Khurana v. Enforcement Directorate. The SPP contended before the bench that while granting interim bail, the special judge did not appreciate the mandatory twin conditions under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering (PMLA) Act. Additionally, the special judge did not grant the SPP an opportunity to oppose the said bail, nor did the special judge record any findings as mandated under Section 45 of the PMLA.

According to the ED, the investigation in the present case stemmed from multiple FIRs registered by the Gurugram Police and Economic Offences Wing (EOW) under various sections of the IPC, 1860, against Amit Katyal, Rajesh Katyal, and others.

The said FIR alleged that both companies, namely, M/s Krrish Realtech Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Brahma City Pvt. Ltd., engaged in real estate business, defrauded numerous investors, and illicitly transferred hundreds of crores abroad through a coordinated scheme involving cheating, deception, and fraud.

Further, the investigation by the ED also revealed that Rajesh Katyal was one of the key conspirators in the collection and diversion of hundreds of crores from prospective plot buyers on the pretext of allotment of plots by entering into agreements with such prospective plot buyers on the basis of a DTCP license in the name of a different company.

Notably, the ED had previously arrested Amit Katyal in connection with the money laundering case. However, he is currently out on bail.

Case Title: Rajesh Katyal v. Enforcement Directorate