Supreme Court issues notice to ED over Satyendar Jain's plea against new judge
Senior Advocate Rahul Mehra, during the rebuttal argument, argued that there is no material to show biasedness on the part of the judge. Rahul Mehra had referred to the application moved by ED seeking transfer of the case to another judge which said that the agency is not casting any aspersions but there is a grave likelihood.
FollowThe Supreme Court on Tuesday issued a notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) after AAP leader Satyendar Jain submitted a plea challenging the Delhi High Court order which dismissed his plea challenging trial court order allowing the agency's petition to transfer his case to another judge. Presently, the AAP leader is under the ED scanner in connection with the money laundering allegations against him.Â
Last week, the Delhi High court had dismissed Jain's plea challenging the trial court order transferring his money laundering case to another judge. Justice Yogesh Khanna dismissed Jain`s plea challenging the order of September 23, 2022, passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge transferring his money laundering case from one court to another.
Also read:Â Shield & sword, shining sun and peepal tree: Shinde led-Sena submits its options to EC for new party symbol
In the order, Justice Khanna noted that the question is not of integrity or uprightness of the Judge but apprehension in the mind of a party (ED).
The AAP leader had moved Delhi High Court challenging Principal District and Sessions Court of Rouse Avenue Court order allowing ED Petition for transfer of his case to another judge.
While passing the order, Justice Khanna observed that the facts show that the ED did not merely harbour an apprehension of bias but had acted upon it as well by rushing to the HC and therefore the apprehension cannot be said to be flimsy or not reasonable.Â
Also read:Â UP civic apathy: E-Rickshaw overturns next to VIP convoy on potholed road, officials don't stop
"The apprehensions raised were not at a belated stage, as the request for an independent medical evaluation was consistently made," the court further observed. The court held that the district judge while transferring the case has considered all these aspects and therefore does not suffer from any illegality and does not require any interference.
The ED had contended that the doctors and jail authorities were managed as the accused earlier had the Health and Jail Department portfolio as Delhi cabinet Minister.
Also read:Â Chief Justice UU Lalit recommends Justice DY Chandrachud as his successor: All you need to know
Senior Advocate Rahul Mehra, during the rebuttal argument, argued that there is no material to show biasedness on the part of the judge. Rahul Mehra had referred to the application moved by ED seeking transfer of the case to another judge which said that the agency is not casting any aspersions but there is a grave likelihood.
On June 6, the ED claimed to have seized Rs 2.85 crore in cash and 133 gold coins weighing 1.80 kg from Satyendra Jain`s aides during its day-long raid conducted at various places across Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR).
