New Delhi, April 23
A Delhi court has issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on a bail plea filed by Indian Political Action Committee (I-PAC) co-founder Vinesh Kumar Chandel in connection with a money laundering probe linked to the alleged coal pilferage case.
Additional Sessions Judge Dhirendra Rana of the Patiala House Courts sought the ED’s response on Chandel’s plea and posted the matter for hearing on April 29.
Chandel is currently in ED custody pursuant to an order passed earlier this month, remanding him to 10 days’ custodial interrogation until April 23.
The federal anti-money laundering agency had arrested Chandel in connection with an ECIR registered on March 28, based on an FIR lodged by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), alleging criminal conspiracy, cheating, falsification of accounts and handling of unaccounted funds by M/s Indian PAC Consulting Pvt Ltd and its directors.
In its remand application, the ED had claimed that Chandel, a founding director of the company, was “actively involved in the process and activity connected with proceeds of crime” and played a central role in devising a mechanism for the “generation, concealment and laundering” of illicit funds.
According to the agency, the company allegedly adopted a modus operandi of splitting receipts between banking channels and cash components, including funds purportedly received from political parties, with references such as “50 per cent cheque” indicating bifurcated payments.
It further claimed that unaccounted funds were used for election-related expenditure and other purposes, including influencing public perception.
It also claimed that Rs 13.50 crore was introduced into the company’s books in the guise of unsecured, interest-free loans from M/s Ramasethu Infrastructure Pvt Ltd without any formal agreements or commercial justification.
The ED has accused the company of raising bogus invoices to justify fund inflows without rendering actual consultancy services and using hawala channels for routing unaccounted money.
It further alleged that Chandel made false statements during the investigation and, along with other directors, instructed deletion of emails and financial data after search proceedings in an attempt to destroy evidence.
Opposing the ED’s earlier remand plea, Chandel’s counsel had argued that the arrest was politically-motivated and timed ahead of Assembly elections, contending that no scheduled offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) was made out.
However, the court, while granting ED custody earlier, had observed that there were “reasons to believe” that Chandel was involved in the alleged laundering of proceeds of crime and had made “false and misleading statements” during the investigation.
