On Sunday, a Bombay High Court vacation bench overturned a special Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) Court ruling. Deshmukh was remanded in ED custody by the HC till November 12. Deshmukh was taken into judicial custody for two weeks after a special vacation court in Mumbai declined to allow the ED more custody of him. The ED detained Deshmukh on Tuesday, and a holiday court ordered him detention for four days till Saturday.
Prashant R Sitre, a special judge, denied ED’s request for extra nine days of Deshmukh’s detention on Saturday. According to the ED investigation, Deshmukh “got illicit payment of around Rs 4.7 crore in cash from multiple orchestra bar owners” between December 2020 and February 2021 while serving as Maharashtra’s home minister through now-dismissed Mumbai police officer Sachin Waze.
Read also: Bombay HC grants bail to Aryan Khan, 2 others in cruise drug case
The ED investigation into Deshmukh’s financial activities coincides with the CBI investigation into charges of corruption levelled against the NCP leader by former Mumbai police commissioner Param Bir Singh. Based on the April 5 HC judgement, the CBI launched a preliminary investigation and filed an FIR on April 21. Deshmukh has refuted the charges.
The sessions court should have realised that in situations of massive frauds and money laundering, such as this one, investigations cannot be anticipated to be finished in a short period. The investigating agency should be given a chance to look into the complete scope of the issue so that it may gather adequate quality evidence to enable it to get to the bottom of the problem.”
“Investigation include not just document study but also interviews with all parties involved.” The revision application sought to declare that the sessions judge “erred in stating that grounds mentioned in the second remand application and grounds mentioned in the first remand application are similar in nature,” and that the sessions judge “erred in stating that grounds mentioned in the second remand application and grounds mentioned in the first remand application are similar in nature.”
Read also: Tejpal case: Bombay HC rejects plea for in camera hearing of appeal
“The accusation of collecting of about Rs. One hundred crores have been made in this case,” the central agency alleged. To bring the guilty to justice, the entire money trail must be established. At this point, the involvement of a foreign party cannot be ruled out. To expose the trail of finances and corroboration and confrontation with other people implicated in the case, sustained interrogation in detention is essential. It should also be noted that denying the applicant ED custody of respondent Deshmukh might obstruct the further investigation.” The high court remanded Deshmukh to the custody of the central agency till November 12 after Deshmukh’s lawyers agreed to it.
