38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, October 03, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Business

Delhi HC rejects bail plea of ex-MD of Bhushan Steel Neeraj Singal in Rs. 46000 cr scam [Read Judgment]

By Shreya Agarwal      09 January, 2024 05:20 PM      0 Comments

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has rejected the bail plea of former Managing Director of Bhushan Steel Ltd in a case alleging loss of Rs. 46,000 cr to the public at large.

Dismissing Singals plea alleging that grounds of arrest were not shown to him, a single judge bench of Justice Vikas Mahajan held merely because each page of the ground of arrest is not signed by the petitioner cannot be a reason to disbelieve the existence of the said document, or to negate the fact that the grounds of arrest were shown and informed to the petitioner.

Rejecting Singals arguments that the place of arrest is wrongly recorded in the Arrest Memo, which implies that the Memo was executed later, the Court relied heavily on the fact that Singal had made corrections in his own handwriting in the ground of arrest.

Singal had inserted in the same that his wife has been informed of his arrest physically at 22.28 on June 9, 2023. The Court concluded that this meant he was arrested from his residence. It also said that despite the fact that this Arrest Memo was there with Singal from the date of arrest itself, he had not raised any dispute about it either in his petition or in the bail application, nor raised before the Special Judge.

Thus, the Court concluded that recording of the place of arrest as Pravartan Bhawan instead of Singals residence, Greater Kailash, was a mere typographical error, and this alone would not vitiate his arrest.

Further, the Court said that Singal and his wife had been furnished a copy of the panchnama (also counter-signed by his wife) which recorded that the Arresting Officer had presented the Arrest Memo to Singal and informed him the grounds of arrest.

Importantly, the Court also held that at the time of Singals arrest, the applicable law regarding grounds of arrest was as laid down in the case of Moin Akhtar Qureshi which continued it was specifically overruled in the case of Pankaj Bansal. 

Therefore, it held that at the time that Singal was arrested, oral communication of the grounds of arrest was sufficient and in compliance with the provisions of Section 19(1) of the PMLA.

Singals arguments

Singal who was represented by Sr. Adv. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Vikas Pahwa, and Sr. Adv. Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, disputed the very existence of ground of arrest and arrest order / reasons to believe at the time of his arrest right from the very beginning as is evident from the remand order dated 10.06.2023.

He argued that the Arrest Memo was the only document which was supplied to him, and the same finds reference in the Panchnama since the arrest was made during the search proceedings. He contended that there is no reference to the Arrest Order and the ground of arrest in the panchnama since they were not handed to him in the first place.

He also argued that the Arrest Order states that the petitioner was arrested at Pravartan Bhawan, which showed that it was not in existence at the time when the search was carried out at Singals residence. 

He further submitted that though the Arrest Order bore Singals signature as an acknowledgement of having received the Arrest Memo, there was no acknowledgement of being informed of the grounds of his arrest.

Enforcement Directorates arguments

The EDs counsel Adv. Zoheb Hussain argued that Singals argument had always been that he had been shown the ground of arrest but not provided with them. 

He said that this was evidenced by the fact that when the Special Judge noted in his order that Singal provided with grounds of his arrest and same is duly signed by him and countersigned by two independent witnesses, he had sought rectification of the order and merely prayed to replace the word provided with the word shown, and sought no other changes. 

ED argued that this establishes that the ground of arrest were shown to Singal and he duly signed the same as a token thereof.

It pointed out that the ground of arrest also clearly bore Singals signatures at two points and the Singal had also appended a date on the same. 

Hossain also pointed out that the fact that his wifes name was recorded in his own handwriting as the person informed of his arrest. He submitted that the endorsement on the ground of arrest that the Singal informed about his arrest physically shows that the arrest had taken place at his residence in the presence of his wife.

Importantly, ED submitted that as laid down in the case of Ram Kishor Arora, furnishing grounds of arrest to the accused/arrested person in writing was not mandatory or obligatory till the date of directions passed in the case of Pankaj Bansal on October 3, 2023 therefore, non-furnishing of grounds of arrest to the petitioner in writing, who was arrested on June 9, 2023, could not be held illegal.

ED further contended that as on the date of Singals arrest it was the law laid down in the case of Moin Akhtar Qureshi which continued till it was specifically overruled, meaning that at the time of Singals arrest, oral communication of the grounds of arrest was proper compliance of the provisions of Section 19(1) of the PMLA.

Courts decision

Agreeing with the EDs contention, the Delhi High Court held that its position is also fortified by the observation of the Supreme Court in the case of Ram Kishor Arora wherein it held that furnishing of grounds of arrest in writing till the date of judgment in the Pankaj Bansal case could neither be held to be illegal nor the action of the concerned officer in not furnishing the same in writing could be faulted with.

Cause Title: Neeraj Singal v Directorate of Enforcement

 

[Read Judgment]



Share this article:

About:

A wanderer, aspiring yogini and writer. Shreya is a lawyer by profession, journalist by passion. A g...Read more

Follow:
FacebookTwitterLinkedinInstagram


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

'Without documentary proof, Waqf Board can't lay claim over any property' 'Without documentary proof, Waqf Board can't lay claim over any property'

In 2012, the Anjuman Committee addressed a letter to the Chairman of the Waqf Board stating there is a wall and Chabutrah (platform) on a 'Tiranga Ki Qalandari Masjid where in olden times laborers used to offer prayers.

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Tribunal's Award Against NHAI in Highway Project Delay Case [Read Judgment] Delhi High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Tribunal's Award Against NHAI in Highway Project Delay Case [Read Judgment]

The Delhi High Court sets aside an Arbitral Tribunal's award favoring IRB Pathankot Amritsar Toll Road Ltd over a delay in a highway project. The court finds that the tribunal did not address the essential dispute of whether the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) was in material default, rendering the award invalid.

Delhi Court Rejects Stay Request in Defamation Case Against Rajasthan CM Ashok Gehlot [Read Order] Delhi Court Rejects Stay Request in Defamation Case Against Rajasthan CM Ashok Gehlot [Read Order]

A Delhi court refuses to stay the defamation case filed by Union Cabinet minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat against Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot. The court declined to stay the summons and sets a hearing date for August 19.

Delhi High Court to Commence Daily Hearings on August 28 for Appeals Against Acquittals in 2G Case Delhi High Court to Commence Daily Hearings on August 28 for Appeals Against Acquittals in 2G Case

Delhi High Court is set to begin day-to-day hearings from August 28 for appeals by CBI and ED against acquittals in the 2G spectrum allocation case, expressing displeasure over adjournment requests. The case involves former telecom minister A Raja and business entities. Learn about the proceedings and details of the case.

TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

sc-allows-manufacturing-of-green-crackers-in-delhi-subject-to-no-sale
Trending Judiciary
SC allows manufacturing of green crackers in Delhi, subject to no sale

SC allows certified manufacturers to produce green crackers in Delhi, but bans their sale in NCR till further orders, balancing pollution and livelihoods.

27 September, 2025 01:23 AM
kerala-hc-directs-comprehensive-snakebite-prevention-guidelines-for-schools
Trending Judiciary
Kerala HC Directs Comprehensive Snakebite Prevention Guidelines For Schools [Read Order]

Kerala High Court directs comprehensive snakebite prevention and management guidelines for schools, ensuring safety, awareness, and emergency response.

30 September, 2025 08:46 PM
sc-orders-two-judicial-officers-to-go-for-seven-days-training-for-flawed-bail-order
Trending Judiciary
SC orders two judicial officers to go for seven days training for flawed bail order [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court quashes flawed bail order, directs two Delhi judges to undergo 7-day special training on judicial conduct and bail rulings.

30 September, 2025 09:58 PM
sc-seeks-reply-from-iit-delhi-kharagpur-on-plea-to-transfer-student-due-to-mental-health-condition
Trending Judiciary
SC seeks reply from IIT Delhi, Kharagpur on plea to transfer student due to mental health condition [Read Order]

SC seeks reply from IIT Delhi & Kharagpur on plea for transfer of B Arch student citing mental health needs, AIIMS proximity & Article 21 rights.

30 September, 2025 11:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email