TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
Don't Miss
Advertisement

PMLA case: ED challenges anticipatory bail to Robert Vadra, claims non-compliance with bail conditions

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

New Delhi, August 16

Advertisement

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Wednesday challenged in the Delhi High Court the anticipatory bail granted to Robert Vadra, the son-in-law of former Congress president Sonia Gandhi, in a money laundering case, claiming non-compliance with bail conditions.

Advertisement

The ED’s counsel said he will file an additional affidavit showing breach of bail conditions by Vadra and sought some time to place it before the court.

Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain granted the ED two weeks to file the additional affidavit and listed the matter for further hearing in September.

The ED had earlier told the high court it wanted to interrogate Vadra in custody, alleging the “money chain” in the case was directly linked to him.

Advertisement

It had also claimed he was not cooperating in the investigation.

Vadra is facing allegations of money laundering in the purchase of a property in London at 12, Bryanston Square, estimated at 1.9 million pounds (over Rs 17 crore). The case is being probed under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Vadra’s lawyer had rejected the ED’s allegations and said his client cooperated in the investigation and appeared before the probe agency whenever summoned.

The high court was hearing the ED’s plea challenging the anticipatory bail granted to Vadra by a trial court on April 1, 2019.

Vadra had opposed the plea, saying there was not even a single instance of his non-cooperation. He said there was no risk of him tampering with evidence as the agency has already seized from him every document pertaining to the case.

The ED was conducting a “fishing and roving enquiry” and has no material to support the allegations made against him, he had claimed.

About the anti-money laundering agency’s claim that he was a flight risk, Vadra had said in his reply, “The conduct of the respondent (Vadra) in returning to India from abroad voluntarily upon reading press reports that ED was investigating him made it abundantly clear that Vadra had no intention whatsoever of fleeing the country and was determined to stay in India and clear the name.”

While granting anticipatory bail to Vadra, the trial court had directed him not to leave the country without prior permission and also to join the probe as and when called by the investigating officer.

Advertisement
Tags :
CongressEnforcementDirectorateRobertVadraSoniaGandhi
Show comments
Advertisement