Ex-Reliance executive Amitabh Jhunjhunwala denied bail in ₹11,000cr money-laundering case
What's the story
A Delhi court has denied bail to Amitabh Jhunjhunwala, a former Reliance executive, in an ₹11,000 crore money laundering case. The court observed that Jhunjhunwala was the "principal architect" of the crime and could influence witnesses if released. Special judge Vishal Pahuja of Rouse Avenue Court issued the order today.
Medical grounds
Jhunjhunwala's deteriorating health condition in jail
Jhunjhunwala's defense argued that his "deteriorating medical condition" in jail warranted bail.
However, the court said he failed to prove that his health couldn't be managed with existing custodial medical infrastructure, including referral hospitals.
The former Reliance Capital vice-chairman was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on April 15 this year, along with ex-Reliance Capital CFO Amit Bapna.
Fraudulent activities
Jhunjhunwala, Bapna accused of diverting funds from RHFL, RCFL
The ED accused Jhunjhunwala and Bapna of diverting funds from Reliance Home Finance Ltd (RHFL) and Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd (RCFL).
They allegedly did this under the pretense of corporate loans to various companies controlled by the Reliance Anil Ambani Group.
The agency also claimed that nearly 90% of these corporate loans were disbursed to shell companies in blatant violation of prudential lending norms.
Defense strategy
Jhunjhunwala falls under 'sick' or 'infirm' categories: Defense counsel
The ED claimed that Jhunjhunwala was the Director of Reliance Capital Ltd (RCAP), the holding company of RHFL and RCFL. He was a key decision-maker in various firm operations.
His counsel, senior advocate Raghav Gupta, sought bail on medical grounds alone, arguing that Jhunjhunwala fell under "sick" or "infirm" categories and thus was exempt from twin conditions under section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Rebuttal
ED's response to medical grounds bail plea
The ED, represented by senior advocate Zoheb Hossain, argued that all necessary medical treatment was being provided to Jhunjhunwala by the jail hospital.
They also claimed he had been taken for consultations at LNJP and AIIMS.
The agency maintained that none of the medical records indicated Jhunjhunwala was suffering from life-threatening diseases or that his continued custody was medically impermissible, due to adequate care being provided regularly.