YES Bank- DHFL Scam: HC shifts CBI & ED cases against Rana Kapoor, Kapil Wadhawan to PMLA Court

 

The Bombay High Court has ordered that the trials going on against Yes Bank founder Rana Kapoor and DHFL promoter Kapil Wadhawan in the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) cases will be conducted together in the special court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Justice RG Avachat passed the order on Thursday while hearing the petitions filed by Kapoor, Wadhawan, and the ED, challenging an order of the Sessions court refusing to transfer the trial in the CBI case to the PMLA court, which was hearing the ED's case.

 

The case against the accused is that between April and June 2018, Yes Bank had invested around Rs 4,727 crores in short-term non-convertible debentures of DHFL. The bank subsequently also sanctioned a term loan of Rs 750 crores to a DHFL group firm. In return, the then Yes Bank MD and CEO, Rana Kapoor, received a kickback of Rs 600 crores from DHFL in the form of a loan to his family firm, Do It Urban Ventures (India) Private Limited.

The accused had first approached the Principal Sessions Judge, seeking transfer of the case. The judge, however, held that being accused, Kapoor and Wadhawan could not file such a request with the court and, if at all, only the agency could file the request. The judge also pointed out that such a request had to be made before the CBI judge where the scheduled offences were being tried.

The ED then filed an application before the CBI court making the same request that cases of both the agencies be tried together. This was, however, rejected by the CBI court in July 2021.

 

After this, both the accused and the ED approached the high court, challenging the orders. It was argued that the PMLA court was competent to try offences under both the CBI and ED.

“The intention of the legislature in contemplating trial of the cases under the scheduled offence and the offence under Section 4 of PMLA by the same court is that the accused should not face multiple prosecutions and the dual agony of trial as the case registered by the Enforcement Directorate is nothing but an off-shoot of the main scheduled offence case and the substratum of both the cases remain the same,” the accused stated.

The accused also stated that since there were a number of common accused, common witnesses and documents in both matters, it would save the accused the agony of a dual trial, if both trials were combined.

 

While the ED did not object to the transfer, the CBI contended that there was no notification that permitted PMLA courts to try offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Source Link 

Social media is bold. 

Social media is young.

Social media raises questions.

 Social media is not satisfied with an answer.

Social media looks at the big picture.

 Social media is interested in every detail.

social media is curious.

 Social media is free. 

Social media is irreplaceable.

But never irrelevant. 

Social media is you.

(With input from news agency language)

 If you like this story, share it with a friend!   

We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our

journalism free from government and corporate pressure .