Excise case: Vijay Nair moves Delhi HC against trial court’s order denying him default bail
Former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) communications in-charge Vijay Nair moved the Delhi High Court challenging a trial court’s order denying him default bail in a money laundering case related to the alleged excise policy scam.
New Delhi: Former Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) communications in-charge Vijay Nair moved the Delhi High Court challenging a trial court’s order denying him default bail in a money laundering case related to the alleged excise policy scam.
Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma did not hold the court on Monday, and the matter has been posted for August 10.
After having reserved its order on July 19, Special Judge M.K. Nagpal of Rouse Avenue Court, had on July 27, refused to grant Nair the relief stating that the issue was already dealt with by the high court.
The high court had dismissed his application for grant of regular bail sought on the ground that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had filed an incomplete prosecution complaint in his case.
“… it is held that this court is not competent or the appropriate forum to consider the above point or ground for default bail of the accused and the appropriate course available to the accused is to approach the same Judge or Bench of the High Court with a request for consideration of the said point or ground,” the judge had said.
” …. the present application filed by accused Vijay Nair is being dismissed as not maintainable before this court,” the judge had added.
Earlier, observing that “allegations are quite serious”, judge Nagpal had denied bail to Nair and four others — Sameer Mahendru, Abhishek Boinpally, Sarath Chandra Reddy, and Benoy Babu. He had held that there is enough incriminating evidence to show the entire “modus operandi” adopted by the accused persons for the commission of offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
On the allegations and role of Nair, the court had said: “Though he was only the media and communications in-charge of AAP, it has been revealed during the investigation of this case that he was actually representing the AAP and GNCTD in different meetings that took place with the stakeholders in liquor business at different places.
“His participation in the meetings in this capacity is to be viewed in light of the facts that he was residing in the official accommodation allotted to a senior Minister of the AAP and once he is even alleged to have represented himself as an OSD in the Excise Department of GNCTD and further that none from the Government or AAP officially participated in these meetings.”
The ED had registered its case based on the FIR lodged by the Central Bureau of Investigation.