Advertisement
Jain’s counsel argued that the trial court took cognisance on the charge sheet on the basis of incomplete material and such a cognisance is not valid under the law.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri listed the matter for October 9 for hearing arguments of the counsel for the parties.
The court also granted permission to Jain’s lawyer to file brief written submissions in the matter.
Related Articles
Advertisement
He said the coordinate bench has held that the trial court has rightly concluded that the prosecution complaint (charge sheet) filed against Ankush Jain and Vaibhav Jain was complete in the sense of containing all the necessary ingredients for the commission of the offence.
The AAP leader’s counsel, however, said the investigation against other accused might be complete but his contention was that the probe qua Satyendar Jain was not complete.
“The cognisance was taken by trial court on the charge sheet based on incomplete material, so it is no cognisance in the eyes of law,” he submitted.
The court was also informed that Jain’s regular bail plea is pending in the trial court.
Jain is accused of having laundered money through four companies allegedly linked to him.
He has challenged a trial court’s May 15 order by which he was denied default bail in the case. The high court had on May 28 issued notice and sought the ED’s response on the petition.
Jain has contended that the ED failed to complete the investigation in all respects within the statutory period and the prosecution complaint (charge sheet), which was incomplete, was filed in an attempt to deprive him of his right to default bail under the provisions of Section 167(2) of the CrPC.
The ED arrested Jain on May 30, 2022 in the money laundering case based on a CBI FIR lodged against him in 2017 under the Prevention of Corruption Act. He was granted regular bail by a trial court on September 6, 2019 in the case lodged by the CBI.
Ankush Jain and Vaibhav Jain were arrested by the ED on June 30, 2022 in the case.