The Delhi High Court has recently issued notice to Delhi police & Enforcement Directorate on two bail pleas of businessman Avtar Singh Kochar.
Kochar is accused in the Rs 200 crore Cheating-Extortion and Money Laundering case allegedly involving Sukesh Chandrasekar. This case includes sections of MCOCA.
It is alleged that Kochar received Rs 8-10 crore in cash as a commission for Hawala. He has challenged the orders of the trial court rejecting his regular bail.
However, his bail plea in the MCOCA case got rejected on July 8, 2022. On May 4, 2023, the bail plea in PMLA case also got dismissed.
Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma issued notices to Delhi police & ED. The court then directed them to file a reply on the bail pleas. The matter has been listed for hearing on July 10.
The plea submitted that, no material/monies were recovered from the applicant even though the allegation is that he took Rs 8-10 crore in cash as a commission for hawala.
On September 14, 2021, the accused got arrested. Afterward, the 1st chargesheet was filed naming the accused. Thereafter it added that 3 chargesheets have been filed but no new material qua the Accused has been uncovered.
It is stated that the accused was suffering from a heart ailment. Previously, he was granted interim bail on many occasions.
The prime accused against whom more than one chargesheet has been filed in the last 10 years.
Therefore, the allegations against the accused are self-contradictory. The offense of extortion and cheating for the same set of facts can’t be made out. While extortion involves an element of threat & intimidation in the first instance, cheating has been an element of dishonest representation.
The plea submitted that the starting points for 2 offenses are different.
Furthermore, the defense is arguing that the statements given by the co-accused, including those that were later withdrawn, indicate that the applicant was involved with Deepak Ramnani after the alleged offenses mentioned in the FIR have already taken place. The defense is likely using this argument to suggest that the applicant’s involvement, if any, occurred after the events in question and should not be attributed to the alleged crimes mentioned in the FIR.
It is also submitted that the accused’s residence was searched where his mobile phone was seized. No material was there to show that the Applicant was part of any conspiracy to commit any crimes penalized by the IPC and as mentioned in the FIR.
Thus, the investigating agencies have failed to make out any case against the Applicant, the plea stated.
