Supreme Court Grants Bail to JJM Scam Accused Padam Chand Jain In PMLA Case, Clarifies That Bail To Manish Sisodia Was Not Granted Under Article 142

While granting bail to Jal Jeevan Mission scam accused Padam Chand Jain in a money laundering case, the Supreme Court today clarified that the order granting bail to former Delhi Deputy CM Manish Sisodia was not passed in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution.The matter was before a bench of Justices BR Gavai, AG Masih and K Vinod Chandran, which noted that Jain has already been granted bail in the predicate offenses, that evidence in the case is primarily documentary in nature, and that charges are yet to be framed.Considering further that co-accused Piyush Jain (Padam Chand Jain's son) and Sanjay Badaya have been granted bail by the Supreme Court, the bench passed the order, stating,"Like in the case of Manish Sisodia, in the present case also, thousands of documents are required to be considered at the stage of trial. So also, around 50 witnesses are required to be examined. The main evidence in the present case is documentary in nature which is already seized by the prosecution agency. As such, there is no possibility of the same being tampered with. It is further to be noted that the Minister for whose benefits the alleged transactions have taken place has also not been implicated as the accused in the present case. The petitioner has already been released on bail in the predicate offenses. In that view of the matter, we are inclined to grant bail to the petitioner herein." Insofar as the impugned order of the Delhi High Court interpreted the Supreme Court's bail order in case of Manish Sisodia as one passed in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the bench clarified,"In Manish Sisodia, the Court has not exercised the powers under Article 142. The Court has held that the twin conditions in Section 45 PMLA cannot override constitutional safeguards as provided under Article 21 of the Constitution. We have held that prolonged incarceration cannot be permitted to convert pre-trial detention into a sentence without trial..."Senior Advocates Siddharth Luthra and Siddharth Aggarwal appeared for Padam Chand Jain and argued inter-alia that co-accused Piyush Jain and Sanjay Badaya have already been granted bail. Further, they emphasized that most of the evidence is documentary in nature (containing 8600 pages) and therefore, there is no possibility of tampering. They also informed that the trial in the case is yet to commence. On the other hand, Additional Solicitor General SV Raju (for ED) opposed Jain's bail plea, contending that his role was much serious as compared to that of co-accused Piyush Jain and Sanjay Badaya. He further submitted that unless the twin conditions under Section 45 PMLA were complied with, bail could not be granted.After hearing the counsels, the bench granted bail to Padam Chand Jain. As per allegations, Jain was involved in securing tenders pertaining to JJM works based on purported fake and fabricated work completion certificates issued by IRCON by bribing senior PHED officials. Further, he received proceeds of crime in his companies, which were "laundered and layered" through a number of bank accounts held in his name, entities and in the name of his family members.Case Title: PADAM CHAND JAIN Versus ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, SLP(Crl) No. 17476/2024Click Here To Read/Download Order

Supreme Court Grants Bail to JJM Scam Accused Padam Chand Jain In PMLA Case, Clarifies That Bail To Manish Sisodia Was Not Granted Under Article 142

Debby Jain

Tags