Delhi’s Rouse Avenue court on Monday granted the Enforcement Directorate (ED) three days of custody for the three accused individuals: Jishan Haider, Dawood Nasir, and Javed Imam Siddiqui.
The arrests were related to a money-laundering case associated with the alleged irregularities in staff recruitment at the Delhi Waqf Board, involving Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Amanatullah Khan. The ED cited the case involving a land transaction worth Rs. 13.40 crores as part of the money laundering investigation.
The agency alleged that the accused individuals were involved in the sale and purchase of property with illicit money connected to Amanatullah Khan. The accused were produced before the court upon the expiration of their initial two-day judicial custody.
Special Judge Arvind Kumar granted the ED three days’ custody of the accused individuals. The ED sought a 14-day remand for all the accused, emphasizing that the individuals were uncooperative in the investigation and evasive in their responses. They argued that the transaction involved illicit money, where Rs. 4 crores were paid in cash.
ED’s Special Public Prosecutor, Manish Jain, claimed there were sufficient grounds for the arrest and that the accused were informed of the grounds. The alleged illicit cash, linked to Amanatullah, was a part of the transaction. When questioned by the court about evidence, the ED referenced a diary belonging to Qausar Imam Siddiqui, containing an entry of Rs. 8 crores, related to Amanatullah, indicating Siddiqui’s role as a middleman. The agency’s counsel further stated that a 14-day remand was required for two main reasons: to confront the accused individuals with each other and to discuss data collected during the investigation.
The accused individuals faced various arguments from their defense counsels. Jishan Haider’s counsel, Advocate Nitish Rana, argued the arrest’s legality, stating that the accused were called to the ED office on November 10 and arrested on November 12 after 24 hours, implying an illegal detention. Rana highlighted that his client had cooperated during previous investigations and that the alleged proceeds of crime were generated seven years prior.
The defense counsel advocated for judicial custody, highlighting Amanatullah’s bail and quashing of LOC for Siddiqui. The defense counsel contended that the accused were detained illegally for over 24 hours before their arrests, highlighting that no individual can be detained without court permission beyond that timeframe. They further emphasized the health conditions of the accused.
The counsels also emphasized the necessity of evidence supporting the money laundering allegations. Furthermore, each accused’s defense counsel argued their lack of direct connection to Amanatullah Khan, implying that the arrests were unjustified.
