The ED has moved the Delhi High Court seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to Robert Vadra, Brother-in-Law of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. Petition filed in the High Court, the ED has argued that Robert Vadra has not complianced the conditions of anticipatory bail. That’s why orders should be passed to cancel his Anticipatory Bail and take him into custody.
The ED’s counsel said that an additional affidavit would be submitted, showing the none-compliance of bail conditions by Vadra. ED has sought a time to place thier affidavit before the court. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain granted two weeks time to the ED to file a supplementary affidavit and posted the next hearing for September.
On the previous date in the High Court as well, the ED had sought permission for custodial interrogation of Vadra. The ED had pointed out Robert Vadra’s direct link to the “money chain” of suspicious money transactions. The ED had also argued that Vadra was not actively cooperating with the ongoing investigation in this regard.
The charges against Vadra are linked to suspected money laundering activities related to the acquisition of a property in London, specifically 12, Bryanston Square, worth 1.9 million pounds (about over Rs 17 crore). The probe is being conducted under the framework of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Vadra’s counsel had refuted the ED’s claims and said that his client had in fact cooperated with the probe and had consistently appeared before the agency as and when called.
The main issue before the High Court pertained to the challenge against Vadra’s anticipatory bail granted by the trial court on April 1, 2019. Vadra opposed the ED’s Report, saying there was no instance of non-cooperation on his part. He emphasized that there is no chance of tampering with the evidence as the agency has already seized all relevant documents related to the case.
Vadra had asserted that the ED probe lacked sufficient evidence to support the allegations, characterizing it as an investigative process based on speculation. Addressing the agency’s concern about his fly-away risk, Vadra, in his response, said, “After learning through press reports that the ED is probing me, my voluntary return to India from abroad is clearly against India.” Demonstrates my intention to stay and clear my name.”
The trial court had granted anticipatory bail to Vadra on the condition that he would not leave the country without prior permission and cooperate with the investigating officer’s inquiry.
UAE-based NRI CC Thampi and Robert Vadra
UAE-based NRI businessman named CC Thampi, had been implicated in a money laundering case involving Robert Vadra, according to the Enforcement Directorate. The case began in February 2019 when Robert Vadra, during questioning by the Enforcement Directorate, claimed to have met CC Thampi on an Emirates flight. In contrast, CC Thampi asserted that he had been introduced to Robert Vadra through Sonia Gandhi’s personal assistant, PP Madhavan.
This inconsistency in their statements was used against Thampi. Thampi, who owns UAE-based companies Skylight Investments and the Holiday Group, attempted to sever any potential ties between his companies and Robert Vadra by rebranding them as Mayfair. Consequently, CC Thampi, a close associate of Robert Vadra in the money laundering case, was arrested on charges of money laundering and acquiring undisclosed foreign assets.
The background of the case involves Robert Vadra, the son-in-law of Congress President Sonia Gandhi, being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate for alleged violations of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The agency claims that Vadra possesses undisclosed foreign assets worth 12 million pounds in London. Vadra is linked to a total of 9 properties, including 3 villas and luxury flats, acquired between 2005 and 2010. He has been repeatedly questioned by the Enforcement Directorate but denies all allegations, dismissing them as a “political witch hunt.” Vadra was also implicated in the Pilatus Defence Deal with arms dealer Sanjay Bhandari, who was subsequently charged under the Official Secrets Act.
