New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday advanced the hearing on Vijay Nair’s bail plea, the businessman and Aam Aadmi Party’s communication in-charge accused in connection with the excise policy scam-related money laundering case, but also said that it amounted to exerting pressure on the court.
The high court was asked for an early hearing after the Supreme Court gave Nair permission to approach the court for his bail plea.
The counsel should be fair to the court and they should see that every day 100 cases are listed for hearing on the board, Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma said.
“I will prepone the date but you should be fair to the court. You see the board. And this is like putting pressure on the court. This is annoying the court,” the judge said.
The high court then moved up the hearing date from the original May 19 to May 9.
On April 12, the high court had issued a notice and sought the Enforcement Directorate (ED)’s response on Nair’s plea seeking bail and had posted the matter for next hearing on May 19.
However, Nair approached the top court urging for advancement of the date of hearing in the high court but the apex court had refused to entertain it at this stage.
Nair’s counsel had earlier argued that he was only the media and communications in-charge of the AAP and had no role in the drafting, framing, or implementing of the excise policy in any manner, and that he (Nair) was being “victimised” for his political background.
A Delhi court had, on February 16, denied bail to Nair and four others.
Observing that the “allegations are quite serious”, special judge M.K. Nagpal of the Rouse Avenue Court had, apart from Nair, denied bail to Sameer Mahendru, Abhishek Boinpally, Sarath Chandra Reddy and Benoy Babu.
He had held that there is enough incriminating evidence to show the entire “modus operandi” adopted by the accused persons for the commission of offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
On the allegations and role of Nair, the court had said: “Though he was only the media and communication in-charge of AAP, it has been revealed during the investigation of this case that he was actually representing the AAP and GNCTD in different meetings that took place with the stakeholders in liquor business at different places. His participation in the meetings in this capacity is to be viewed in light of the facts that he was residing in the official accommodation allotted to a senior Minister of the AAP and once he is even alleged to have represented himself as an OSD in the Excise Department of GNCTD and further that none from the Government or AAP officially participated in these meetings.”
On Thursday, however, senior advocate Manish Vashisht, who was representing Nair, urged the court to disregard the notion that they were attempting to exert any sort of pressure.
To this, Justice Sharma said: “That impression is certainly there and will remain. There are so many people lodged in jail. You want a special treatment to be given. You can afford to go to the Supreme Court so you are going.”
(IANS)
