AAP Leader Sanjay Singh: The Supreme Court granted bail to Aam Aadmi Party leader and Rajya Sabha member Sanjay Singh. A bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice PB Barale heard the case. Congress leader and senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared in court on behalf of Sanjay Singh. He argued that there is no case against his client. He said that the ED did not follow the necessity test in arresting Singh.
Table of Contents
What is section 3 of PMLA?
After the arrest of Sanjay Singh, when ED sought his custody, he was termed as the ‘main conspirator’. However, Sanjay Singh is not an accused in the alleged liquor scam of Delhi, which is being investigated by CBI, rather ED has accused him of legalizing the income obtained from the alleged scam. To put it in simpler words, Sanjay Singh’s case is exactly like that of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal. Kejriwal is also not accused of corruption in the liquor scam, rather he is also accused of money laundering.
Section 3 of the PMLA law i.e. Prevention of Money Laundering Act also considers hiding money obtained illegally as a crime.
What are the allegations against Sanjay Singh?
ED had said in its demand application that Sanjay Singh received illegal money/bribe/benefit through Delhi’s Excise Policy of 2021-22, which comes under the purview of proceeds of crime. He was involved in a conspiracy to collect bribes from liquor traders. Sanjay Singh has a close relationship with Dinesh Arora since 2017 and this has also been revealed from the call records of both.
Dinesh Arora is a businessman. ED alleges that Arora is the person who acted as a middleman for money transactions between South Group and AAP. ED claims that Arora negotiated with several restaurant owners at the behest of Sanjay Singh and arranged for a cheque of Rs 82 lakh to be paid into the party fund for the upcoming elections. ED also alleged that Rs 2 crore in cash was given to the AAP leader through Sanjay Singh’s aide Sarvesh Mishra, who is also an accused under PMLA.
Arora is now a government witness
Let us tell you that Dinesh Arora became a government witness in the CBI case in 2022 and got bail. Then in July 2023, the ED arrested him and he became a government witness in the ED case as well. In such a situation, the entire case against AAP leader Sanjay Singh depends on the veracity of Dinesh Arora’s statement.
What is the game of section 45 of PMLA law? Sanjay Singh got bail, but Manish Sisodia is in Tihar jail
The Supreme Court granted bail to AAP leader Sanjay Singh. During the hearing on the bail application, the ED said that it has no objection in granting bail. Let’s understand why the agency said so.
Why no evidence in 5 months?
During the hearing in the Supreme Court, Sanjay Singh’s lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that Dinesh Arora did not mention Sanjay Singh in his 9 statements and took his name in the tenth statement. He said that even after 5 months of Sanjay Singh’s arrest, the ED could not gather any concrete evidence. For example, if Dinesh Arora gave Rs 2 crore to Sanjay Singh, it should have been recovered. Apart from this, other claims of Dinesh Arora should also have been confirmed by other witnesses.
The ED had accused Sanjay Singh of receiving crime proceeds or bribe of Rs 2 crore from co-accused Sameer Mahendru and Sameer Bonpalli through Arora. Singhvi said that Sameer Mahendru has clearly stated that he did not give any such bribe.
Why did ED not oppose the bail?
While Singhvi was arguing, Justice Khanna said that ED should explain why the agency did not confiscate any property of the AAP leader. The Supreme Court asked that Sanjay Singh has been in jail for 6 months, why should he be kept in jail any more? On this, ED said that it has no objection to granting bail to Sanjay Singh. The Supreme Court also said that if you (ED) oppose the bail, then the court will have to consider the bail under PMLA.
How will the agency benefit?
If the Supreme Court had granted bail under section 45 of the PMLA law, it could have said that prima facie charges against AAP leader Sanjay Singh were not proved. This would have weakened the ED’s case. In such a situation, the ED decided that it would not oppose the bail.
