ED accuses Naresh Goyal of hindering money laundering probe

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has informed the Bombay High Court that it arrested Naresh Goyal, the founder of Jet Airways, due to his uncooperative behavior, which significantly impeded the progress of their money laundering investigation. This revelation was made in an affidavit submitted by the ED, emphasizing that Goyal’s lack of cooperation suggested a malicious […]

by TDG Network - October 10, 2023, 12:34 pm

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has informed the Bombay High Court that it arrested Naresh Goyal, the founder of Jet Airways, due to his uncooperative behavior, which significantly impeded the progress of their money laundering investigation. This revelation was made in an affidavit submitted by the ED, emphasizing that Goyal’s lack of cooperation suggested a malicious intent to defraud banks.
According to the affidavit, Goyal exhibited non-cooperative, evasive, and suspicious behavior in his statements and actions, leading to his arrest. The agency believed that his deliberate obstruction and failure to provide documents and information indicated embezzlement and siphoning of loan amounts with the intention to defraud banks, thereby slowing down their investigation.
The affidavit was filed in response to Goyal’s habeas corpus writ petition challenging his arrest. Goyal was arrested by the ED on September 1 in a case where he was accused of cheating and misappropriating funds, resulting in a wrongful loss of ₹538 crores to Canara Bank.
In his petition, Goyal argued that his arrest lacked proper justification and that the ED had failed to demonstrate any grounds for money laundering. The ED countered this by asserting that the arrest memo was prepared and authorized, and Goyal was duly informed of the grounds for his arrest. The affidavit also contended that the remand order issued by the special PMLA court was in compliance with statutory provisions and based on judicial consideration. The ED contended that Goyal’s petition was not maintainable as the challenge to remand orders should be pursued in accordance with the statute, rather than invoking the High Court’s extraordinary jurisdiction.