PHED Scam: Supreme Court issues notice in ex-Rajasthan Minister Mahesh Joshi's bail plea

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a petition filed by former Rajasthan minister Mahesh Joshi, seeking regular bail in connection with a Jal Jeevan Mission-linked money laundering case.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih have issued notice today on the petition moved by the Minister making it returnable in four weeks.

Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra along with Advocate Vivek Jain appeared for Joshi.

Joshi has filed a Special Leave Petition before the apex court challenging the judgment dated 26 August, 2025 of the Rajasthan High Court's Jaipur Bench denying him regular bail. It is the former minister's case that High Court has failed to consider the fact that all the arrested co-accused persons in the present case have been granted regular bail.

Supreme Court has been told that in the impugned judgment High Court failed to consider the following undisputed facts- a) that the complaint stands already filed b) there is no likelihood of the trial to even commence in the near future c) large quantity of evidence which documentary in nature, hence no apprehension of tampering.

As per allegations, Joshi while acting as the PHED Minister colluded with co-accused Sanjay Badaya and collected bribe money in return of tenders to M/s Shri Ganapati Tubewell and M/s Shri Shyam Tubewell for NIT No. 6-7 /2022-23.

On the allegations made by ED that a deposit of Rs. 50 Lakh was into the account of M/S Sumangalam Landmark LLP (firm owned and run by Joshi's son), it has been submitted that as per the bank statements of Sumangalam Landmark LLP, the said amount was raised as a friendly loan and the entire amount stands returned to the concerned persons even before the registration of FIR in the predicate offence. "This amount thus cannot be treated as bribe and hence there exist no proceeds of crime in the present case. There is no other amount for which any substantial allegation based on any evidence that is alleged against the Petitioner", the plea submits.

Court has been told that when the petitioner held the office as the Minister of PHED (Public Health and Engineering Department), the co-accused firms were already holding other tenders in the department and once irregularities came to the notice of the department, following the due process, the petitioner himself initiated inquiries and subsequent stern actions of blacklisting were taken against the erring firms.

"Till date there are 19 accused persons, 66 persons have been arrayed as witnesses and there are 184 documents running into 14,652 pages and there is no likelihood of the trial to begin, let alone concluding", the petitioner has stated while highlighting the principle of "Bail is rule and Jail is exception".

The SLP further relies on Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement, wherein the Supreme Court emphasized the paramount importance of the right to a speedy trial and personal liberty, holding that prolonged incarceration without timely progression of trial violates Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court had further noted that custodial detention should not be punitive; rather, its sole purpose is to secure the attendance of the accused.

Case Title: SH. MAHESH JOSHI vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

Hearing Date: September 15, 2025

Bench: Justices Datta and Masih