A special court in Gurugram designated for cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) has rejected the regular bail plea of former Congress legislator Dharam Singh Chhokar. The case, involving an alleged fraud of Rs 600 crore, is being probed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Court Cites Lack of Merit in Bail Plea
The decisive order was pronounced by District and Sessions Judge Vani Gopal, who is also exercising powers as the Special PMLA Judge. In a detailed 32-page ruling, the court firmly stated that the application moved by Chhokar held no merit and the grounds presented were insufficient for granting bail.
Chhokar had filed his application for regular bail on November 17. The final hearing took place on December 16, culminating in the rejection. The former MLA has been in judicial custody at Gurugram jail since his dramatic arrest by ED officials from a hotel on May 5 of this year.
Defence Arguments and Prosecution's Strong Opposition
In his defence, Chhokar's counsel argued that he was not associated with the implicated company, Mahira Group, at the time the alleged offences took place. The defence also pointed out that his name was absent from the majority of the predicate cases upon which the ED based its investigation, initiated by registering an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) in Gurugram. Several other reasons were presented to make a case for either regular or default bail.
However, the prosecution, represented by special public prosecutors, mounted a vigorous opposition. They presented a voluminous set of documents and records to substantiate Chhokar's deep involvement in the case. The ED prosecutor provided a detailed list of companies linked to the transactions.
A key point of contention raised by the prosecution was Chhokar's conduct. They highlighted how he had been avoiding non-bailable warrants issued by the court prior to his arrest. The prosecutors also expressed strong apprehension that, if released, Chhokar could use his influence to jeopardise the ongoing proceedings and investigation. They emphasised his non-cooperative attitude during the investigative process.
Court's Reasoning and Twin Conditions of PMLA
Agreeing with the submissions of the ED, the court denied relief to the accused. The judge's observation was critical. The order stated, "Having regard to the totality of circumstances, the nature and gravity of allegations, the material placed on record, and the conduct of the applicant and mandatory rigor of Section 45 of PMLA Act, this court is not satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicant is not guilty of the offence of money laundering."
The court further noted, "The court is also satisfied that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The twin conditions are not fulfilled." Section 45 of the PMLA imposes stringent twin conditions for bail, requiring the court to be satisfied that the accused is prima facie not guilty and is unlikely to commit any offence while on bail. The judge concluded that Chhokar's application for default or regular bail was devoid of merit and hence dismissed.
Chhokar is one of the co-accused in the extensive case related to the Mahira Group. While one of his sons has secured bail, another son is still facing legal proceedings in the same matter.
