₹2,700 crore bank fraud case: Supreme Court denies interim bail to former Amtek Group chairperson Arvind Dham
In a major setback for former Amtek Group chairperson Arvind Dham, the Supreme Court on Monday refused to grant him interim bail in a money laundering case related to a ₹ 2,700 crore bank fraud.
On 7 April, a three-judge bench headed by then Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna also denied bail to Dham and directed him to surrender at the jail the following morning.
'We aren't at all impressed by the tactics of the petitioner. Your SLP (special leave petition) was dismissed by a three-judge bench of this court. Now you are trying to get in during this vacation and trying to get the same relief in a matter which has already been dismissed,' a SC bench comprising Justices Sandeep Mehta and Prasanna B Varale said on Monday.
Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Dham, said his client had been in jail for 11 months and that his regular bail plea had been pending in the Delhi High Court since February 2025. He then withdrew the plea.
'We don't understand the appearance of senior counsel in vacations. This court has often commented on that,' the apex court said.
The Delhi High Court had extended his interim bail on medical grounds till 7 April.
Recently, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) provisionally attached fresh assets worth over ₹ 550 crore of Amtek Group firms, an insolvent automotive equipment manufacturing company, in the alleged ₹ 2,700 crore bank loan fraud case under the anti-money-laundering law.
Dham was arrested by the ED in July last year and was chargesheeted in September.
The ED said in a statement that action was taken against Amtek Auto Limited, ARG Limited, ACIL Limited, Metalyst Forging Limited, Castex Technologies Limited, and Amtek Group promoter Arvind Dham, among others.
In September last year, properties worth ₹ 5,115.31 crore were attached by the agency in the case.
The ED started its probe under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) on 27 February 2024, following the directions of the Supreme Court.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
ED summons Chandigarh-based arms dealer for allegedly ‘routing questionable funds via Slovenia, Australia, UK & US'
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has summoned Hardeep Singh, alias H S Bedi, a Chandigarh-based arms dealer. According to sources, Bedi is under scrutiny and has been summoned for allegedly 'routing questionable funds through foreign bank accounts held in Slovenia, Australia, UK and US'. Sources added that the ED is probing deeper into the financial trail raising concerns over foreign fund diversions in the foreign bank accounts of Bedi and summons have been issued to him as part of the ED's agency's ongoing crackdown on foreign funds diversions through various bank accounts. They disclosed that Bedi has been asked to appear before the investigating officials of the ED at their office in Chandigarh, on Thursday. Talking to The Indian Express, on phone, Bedi said, 'I have not got it (the summons). Also, I would not like to talk on the phone about it'. Bedi runs a shooting arms and ammunition import company called Artek India. The company's website claims that it is one of the biggest importer companies for shooting arms and ammunition formed with an 'aim to create the high performance culture in India'. Bedi, who is based in Chandigarh, started the company in 2015. 'Shooting equipment and accessories should not be difficult to find, we put them all in one location so you don't have to search all over the internet. The company is working as a one-stop shop for Indian shooters requirements. We are the hub of the best brands in shooting sports from all over the world,' Bedi's company website mentions.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Consider setting up permanent consumer courts: SC to Centre
Nagpur: The Supreme Court recently directed the central govt to create a permanent adjudicatory framework comprising full-time staff and presiding officers for consumer disputes in India. The Centre was directed to submit an affidavit in three months on the feasibility of setting up a permanent consumer tribunal or court. It emphasised that consumer forums cannot be run on temporary tenure-based appointments. "We would only implore upon it to appreciate the pressing need for a permanent structure," the bench noted. The court, invoking powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, passed sweeping directions in a batch of appeals, while ruling on the legality and structure of consumer forums under the 2020 Rules. The SC directed that the new rules, to be notified within four months, must strictly follow earlier judgments in Rojer Mathew and Madras Bar Association cases and include a fixed five-year tenure. It also ruled that the selection committee must have a judiciary-majority composition. No written exam or viva voce will be needed for appointing or reappointing presidents and judicial members of state and district commissions, while such a process will be required only for non-judicial posts, in consultation with respective state service commissions. The SC upheld that only serving or retired district judges would be eligible for the post of district commission presidents. Once the new rules are in place, all states must complete recruitment under them within four months. Striking a Constitutional note, the bench stated, "Consumerism constitutes the very spirit of the Constitution," linking it with Articles 38, 39, and 47. It called consumer rights inalienable and remarked that consumer litigation is a form of public interest litigation, strengthening participatory democracy — a basic feature of the Constitution. The judgment also addressed three HC rulings from Bombay and Telangana concerning appointment procedures. It upheld the Bombay HC's decision to strike down parts of the 2020 Rules but modified certain aspects relating to reappointments and tenure clarifications. It also ruled that all serving appointees, whether selected before or after the Supreme Court's first ruling in the case in March 2023, may continue until the completion of fresh recruitment under the new rules. Tushar Mandlekar, assisted by Tejas Fadnavis, Astha Sharma and Anju Thomas, represented the original petitioner Mahendra Limaye, a Nagpur-based lawyer, while assistant solicitor general Aishwarya Bhati appeared for the central govt. Limaye had approached Nagpur bench of Bombay HC challenging an advertisement issued in May this year for recruitment of members or president in district and state consumer commissions in Maharashtra. The HC order stated, "Rule 6(1) of the Rules of 2020 is struck down on the ground that the same results in diluting the involvement of the judiciary in the process of appointment of the president and members of the state commission and the district commission. The said Rule is against the spirit of the decision of the Constitution Bench". The SC bench made it clear that existing appointees allowed to continue under this judgment will serve a four-year tenure, not the new five-year term. "We feel that the time has come to effect a change in mindset revamping the tenure of office in consumer fora," the judges observed.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
IRCTC & Land-for-jobs-cases: ED to expedite conclusion of arguments on charges against Lalu and others
New Delhi: In a bid to kickstart its money laundering trials against RJD chief Lalu Prasad, his kin and others, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) will expedite its arguments on framing of charges in two cases allegedly involving former Union railways minister Lalu Prasad and his kin, including his wife Rabri Devi and son Tejashwi Yadav , said people in the know. The two money laundering cases under relevant provisions of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) were registered on the basis of two FIRs registered by the CBI in the IRCTC case and land-for-jobs case . While a special CBI court is expected to pronounce its order on framing of charges against Lalu and his kin for their alleged involvement in the IRCTC corruption scandal on July 23. The CBI, in the second corruption case against Lalu and others, is about to conclude its arguments on framing of charges against the accused. The ED cases had been pending on account of a contentious legal issue raised by the accused demanding documents not relied upon by ED. The matter had reached the Supreme Court on a plea filed by one of the co-accused. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Daughter thought she had saved 'cute bunnies.' The vet pales when he realizes what they really are Cleverst Undo The case remained hanging since the SC reserved its judgement on the issue in September 2024 and delivered a pronouncement in May this year. People in the know said that ED will supply documents not relied upon to the accused and conclude its arguments on framing of charges after which the accused will present their counter case. The court will then pronounce its judgment on whether the prosecution has produced sufficient evidence to kickstart the two trials against Lalu and others. Live Events
