Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Raj Singh Gehlot Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Delhi High Court)
Appeal Number : Bail App. 4295/2021
Date of Judgement/Order : 02/03/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Raj Singh Gehlot Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Delhi High Court)

As per the prosecution complaint, in total, Term loan of Rs.810 crores was availed by AHPL and sanctioned by the consortium of banks. The funds were disbursed through an Escrow Account maintained with J&K Bank, Ansal Plaza Branch.

The FIR was registered against the applicant, AHPL and others on the allegation that the Term loan taken from J&K Bank was misappropriated and the funds were siphoned off. Subsequently, the ECIR in question was recorded in relation to commission of offence under Sections 3/4 PMLA. It has been alleged that the sole purpose for which the Term loan was sanctioned was the implementation of AHPL’s hotel at Shahdara. But the funds obtained thereunder were put to other uses, for the direct/indirect benefit of the accused. In this regard, attention was drawn to ‘other terms and conditions’ of sanction of Rs.100 crores to AHPL, which included:-

“(iv) The company to undertake that funds will not be utilised for any purpose other than for implementation of the project.”

As per the prosecution complaint, out of Rs.810 crores, an amount of Rs.781 crores was routed through the Escrow Account. It is also stated that while a sum of Rs.156.5 crores was transferred to APL, Rs.66 crores were transferred to AHPL. Further, Rs.445.5 crores were transferred to 21 entities and Rs.49 crores to 4 individuals, who were non-contracting parties having no connection with the hotel project. On receipt of payments, said parties transferred an amount of Rs.461 crores (93 percent of the received amount) to M/s Raj Commercials and Agencies and M/s M&N Commercials. While M/s Raj Commercials and Agencies was the HUF concern of the applicant, M/s M&N Commercials was the HUF concern of Late Sh. Nakul Gehlot (nephew of the applicant). Both the entities were controlled by the applicant. It has come in the investigation that the amounts received by M/s Raj Commercials and Agencies and M/s M&N Commercials were further diverted to Ambience Group companies, which ultimately utilized the funds to settle unrelated loans and to make fixed deposits.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031