Former J&K Minister Lal Singh’s Anticipatory Bail Denied in PMLA Case: Money Laundering Investigation Continues

Jammu, 07-11-2023 : In a significant legal development, an anti-corruption court in Jammu has made decisions regarding the anticipatory bail pleas of former Jammu and Kashmir minister Lal Singh and his family members in connection with a money laundering case. The case pertains to allegations of financial impropriety related to an educational trust run by Lal Singh’s wife, Kanta Andotra. While the court dismissed Lal Singh’s anticipatory bail application, it extended the interim anticipatory bail for his wife, Kanta Andotra, and their daughter, Kranti Singh, until November 30, with a directive to fully cooperate with the investigating agency.

The court, presided over by Special Judge Bala Jyoti, issued three separate orders after hearing arguments from the special public prosecutor, Ashwani Khajuria, representing the Enforcement Directorate (ED), and advocate Rajesh Kotwal, who appeared on behalf of the applicants.

Lal Singh, his wife, and daughter had submitted separate applications seeking pre-arrest bail on November 1, citing alleged offenses under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The court had granted them interim bail while seeking a detailed response from the ED.

The case revolves around money laundering allegations related to the acquisition of land exceeding the prescribed ceiling limit of 100 standard kanals. The ED had conducted searches in Jammu, Kathua, and Punjab’s Pathankot on October 17 in connection with the investigation. These searches were part of the probe into the RB Educational Trust, its chairperson, and Ravinder S, a former revenue official.

The ED’s inquiry is rooted in a charge sheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in October 2021, which raised concerns about the issuance of land between January 4 and January 7, 2011, without adequate details regarding the violation of land ceiling limits. This alleged oversight is believed to have provided an undue financial advantage to the trust, which subsequently acquired multiple parcels of land through three gift deeds executed on January 5 and January 7, 2011.

The court, concurring with the arguments presented by SPP Khajuria, emphasized the gravity of the accusations, the nature of the charges, and the stage of the investigation. It was of the view that the investigating agency needed sufficient time to conduct a comprehensive and effective inquiry. Consequently, the court found that Lal Singh was not entitled to bail at this stage, as this could potentially hinder the ongoing investigation. The court also noted that the pre-arrest bail was initially granted for a limited period and was contingent on cooperation with the investigating agency.

The court highlighted the broad powers conferred upon the ED by the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) for conducting searches, seizures, and investigations. It recognized money laundering as a serious threat, not only to the financial system of the country but also to the global economy, and stressed the need to deal with it sternly.

In the case of Kanta Andotra, a former legislator, the court considered her existing absolute bail in the CBI charge sheet, which serves as the foundation of the predicate offense. The court extended her interim bail until November 30, with the condition that she must cooperate fully with the investigating agency.

Similarly, the court extended the interim bail of Kranti Singh, who serves as one of the trustees of the educational trust, until November 30. Kranti Singh was also directed not to violate the conditions of bail, which include cooperating with the investigating agency without fail.

These legal proceedings underscore the complexities and legal intricacies surrounding the money laundering case linked to the educational trust and the individuals involved. The court’s decisions reflect the consideration of various legal factors, including the seriousness of the allegations and the need for a thorough investigation.