Court denies bail to Sameer Mahendru in Delhi excise case

Delhi court denies regular bail to Sameer Mahendru in a money laundering case linked to Delhi excise policy irregularities, citing prolonged investigation.

A Delhi court has denied regular bail to Sameer Mahendru — an accused in a money laundering case registered by Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with alleged irregularities in the Delhi excise policy 2021-22 — dismissing his second bail application.

Businessman Sameer Mahendru an accused in a money laundering case registered by Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with alleged irregularities in the Delhi excise policy 2021-22 . (PTI)

“This application filed by Sameer Mahendru seeking his regular bail in the case again from this court is being dismissed” said special judge MK Nagpal in the order passed on February 24.

Mahendru had moved a second regular bail application on February 1 before the court on the ground of prolonged incarceration and delay in conducting the trial. It was pointed out that he has been incarcerated since September 2022, and since then, a period of 17 months has passed but the trial has not begun.

He further highlighted that despite filing six chargesheets, the investigation in the case was still stated to be pending and he is entitled to bail as the trial in the case is yet to begin and there is no likelihood of it concluding soon.

The bail application was vehemently opposed by the federal agency.

The court, while dismissing the bail petition, noted that though the probe in the case is pending, the investigation regarding Mahendru has concluded, and the delay in starting the trial is because the process of scrutiny of document is found to be dragged.

“Investigation in a money laundering case is a complicated and intricate affair and it takes time to conclude and simply because an accused remains incarcerated in a case of money laundering for a year or so, it cannot be made a ground to release him on bail if the conditions laid down in Section 45 of the PMLA are attracted qua him,” the court said.

Mahendru had also argued before the court that there has been material change in circumstances, after his first bail application was dismissed by the court, as he was granted regular bail in separate probe conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in connection with the case.

The court, however, refuted the argument, stating that it cannot be considered as a material change because he was granted regular bail in the CBI case as he was prosecuted without arrest and was entitled to regular bail.

The court also refused to consider the ground of parity taken by Mahendru while seeking regular bail stating that there was no parity in the roles, position and circumstances between Mahendru and other accused who were granted bail.