Conman Sukesh’s ‘aide’ Pinky Irani granted bail in PMLA case

16

A court here has granted bail to Pinky Irani, who is allegedly an aide of multimillionaire conman Sukesh Chandrasekhar, in connection with Rs 200 crore money laundering case.

Additional Sessions Judge Praveen Singh of Patiala House said the court does not find that there is any possibility of the accused tampering with the evidence. “The accused, a woman of advanced age, therefore, once the investigation has been completed and the evidence, which is mostly documentary in nature, has been collected, I do not find that there is any possibility of accused applicant tampering with the evidence,” the bench noted.

“considering the overall facts and circumstances, I find that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the accused in further custody,” the court said in the order dated February 15. Accordingly, she was given bail on a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh with surety of the like amount.

Advocate R.K. Handoo who appeared for the applicant argued that the whole case is based on statements that will be testified during the course of the trial.

Last month, the Delhi High Court had issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on the bail application of Pinky Irani. A resident of Mumbai, Irani was arrested in December last year by the ED and also confronted with Sukesh Chandrasekhar inside the Tihar Jail. She is the ninth person held in the case.

Those who were earlier arrested are Pradeep Ramdanee, B. Mohan Raj, Deepak Ramnani, Arun Muthu, Kamlesh Kothari, Avatar Singh Kochhar, Sukesh Chandrashekhar, and his wife Leena Maria Paul.

In the last hearing, Advocate Yoginder Handoo, appearing for Pinky Irani argued that since November 25, his client is under the 24×7 watch of the Enforcement officials, in Claridges Hotel and Park Hotel and was officially arrested on December 9, 2021.

The allegations of violation of provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) against the applicant are misconceived on facts and untenable in law, which the trial court has failed to appreciate and does not make out any case on facts and law against the applicant under the provisions of PMLA, he submitted.

20220216-160804

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here