The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Friday told the Bombay High Court that all legal procedures were complied with while arresting Jet Airways founder Naresh Goyal in connection with the alleged laundering of a loan of Rs 538.62 crore given by the Canara Bank. The ED said his arrest was necessary as Goyal was “highly uncooperative, recalcitrant, evasive and suspicious in his statements and conduct” and his non-cooperation had slowed the pace of investigation.
Goyal, who was arrested on September 1, had claimed that his arrest was illegal and sought to set aside orders of a special court that initially remanded him in ED custody and thereafter in judicial custody.
A division bench of Justice Revati Mohite-Dere and Justice Gauri V Godse had on September 20 asked ED to file its reply within two weeks. After Goyal’s counsel said the 74-year-old petitioner should be granted relief of interim bail pending hearing of the plea, the bench said he can move a separate bail application in that regard. Taking ED’s affidavit in reply on record, the bench posted further hearing in Goyal’s plea to October 12.
Goyal has sought direction to release him from “abjectly unlawful and arbitrary custody and incarceration” and also sought to quash and set aside the arrest memo and arrest order of September 1 along with remand applications and orders of September 2 and 11 and their effect and implementation. Pending disposal of the plea, Goyal has sought temporary release from custody and stay the effect of arrest and remand orders.
“Petitioner’s deliberate attempt for non-cooperation and non-submission of documents/information proved that the loan amounts were embezzled and siphoned off in a piecemeal manner with mala fide intention to defraud the banks,” ED’s affidavit filed through Sudhanshu Srivastava, its Assistant Director at Mumbai Zonal office stated.
It added that non-cooperation by Goyal through his “elusive and misleading” answers ‘slowed the pace of investigation’ which involved a large number of fictitious banking transactions and therefore his custodial interrogation was deemed necessary.
Most Read
Asian Games 2023, Day 13 Highlights: Satwiksairaj Rankireddy-Chirag Shetty enter final; Men’s hockey team takes gold
AR Rahman issues legal notice to surgeons’ association seeking Rs 10 crore damages, unconditional apology
See More
The ED argued that Goyal is “very influential, intelligent and resourceful person” and the crime was committed by him with ‘full pre-meditation’ so that the offence would not be detected, therefore his custody was required to identify proceeds of crime. Moreover, there was every possibility of him tampering evidence, which would adversely affect the probe.
The agency also said that Goyal was ‘mastermind’ in undertaking transactions and incorporating shell companies to channelise proceeds of crime and his arrest memo was duly prepared as per guidelines and information about the arrest was duly intimated to his wife as per law.
It added that habeas corpus plea will not be maintainable since when it was filed, the detention of petitioner was authorised by the competent trial court. The ED further said the remand orders of special court under PMLA were well reasoned.
