Representative image of a gavel.
Credit: iStock Photo
New Delhi: A Delhi court on Tuesday granted regular bail to an accused in a money laundering case linked to a UPA-era defence deal with aircraft manufacturer Embraer.
The court, which had on February 16 granted interim bail to the accused while holding his arrest to be illegal, granted him regular bail on a personal bond of Rs five lakh with one surety of the like amount.
Special Judge Anil Antil noted that the charge sheet in the case was filed in 2021 after the completion of the investigation and without the arrest of the accused, Dev Inder Bhalla, Director of the accused company Interdev Aviation Services Pvt Ltd, Singapore.
“Therefore, in light of my above discussion, taking note of the factual matrix of the case and the directions issued by the superior courts, the case of the accused falls in the category of a complaint 'without arrest',” the judge said.
The application claimed that Bhalla was not required for custodial interrogation and that there was no possibility of tampering with the evidence or influencing witnesses.
Bhalla, an alleged middleman in the case, was intercepted by the immigration authorities at Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport, Kolkata, on February 13, 2023 and was arrested on the night of February 14, 2023 by the ED.
The matter pertains to the supply of 3 EMP-145 aircraft to the Indian government. It was alleged that Bhalla created shell companies to launder money received as commission in the aircraft deal.
The judge had on February 16 noted that the agency had arrested Bhalla on the basis of a non-bailable warrant issued in 2018, while it had already filed a charge sheet after that and its cognisance was taken in March 2021.
The court had issued summons to the accused and when those remained unserved, fresh summons were issued.
“So, when after carrying out the investigation, complaint/ charge sheet has been filed against the accused herein; cognisance of the offences has been taken; summons have been issued pursuant to that, the act of the agency in apprehending/ arresting the accused without the permission of the court, and/or seeking his Police Custody remand is totally unjustified in the given facts and circumstances of the case,” the judge had said in the February 16 order.