Anil Ambani (PTI image)
NEW DELHI: Amitabh Jhunjhunwala, a former close associate of Anil Ambani and ex vice-chairperson of Reliance Capital arrested on Wednesday, has told a special court here that ED has indulged in “pick and choose” by arresting him instead of going after the “actual beneficiary of Rs 11,500 crore” of proceeds of crime.In his submission before the special court (Rouse Avenue district court), Jhunjhunwala, 70, cited his own email seized and produced by ED before the court to argue these showed all decisions pertaining to corporate loans being probed for alleged laundering were taken at the instructions of Anil Ambani.Appearing for Jhunjhunwala, senior advocate Sidharth Agarwal said the enforcement agency hasn’t caught the “actual culprit” who had indulged in alleged money laundering from Anil Ambani group entities.The special court prima facie accepted ED’s charges and sent Jhunjhunwala and Amit Bapna, another former senior executive of the group, to five days of ED custody for further interrogation.“The material on record indicates that there is imminent possibility of involving some other persons and the entire money trail of about Rs 11,500 crore is required to be traced so that the proceeds of crime are recovered,” special judge Hasan Anzar observed. Both Jhunjhunwala and Bapna pleaded relief on arrest from the court as they said they have been made witnesses in the predicate offence case registered by CBI, based on which ED has initiated its money laundering investigation.“Bare perusal of the email dated May 15, 2017, would reveal that whenever any email was sent, it was copied to higher-ups such as Anil Ambani, Lalit Jalan, etc, and in the email, there is reference to ‘ADA’, and the investigating agency did not investigate on these aspects and each and every instruction was given by ‘ADA’ and the top management, and at the most the accused (Jhunjhunwala) has only passed the instructions from the top management,” Jhunjhunwala’s counsel told the court.Reacting to Jhunjhunwala’s claims, a spokesperson for Anil Ambani referred to paragraph 24 of the special court’s order that points to definition of PMLA section 3 which states that “whoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assist or is involved in any process or activity connected with proceeds of crime, including its concealment, acquisition or use shall be guilty of the offence of money laundering”.ED, in its submission, said its investigation so far has revealed “a preconceived and well-planned scheme to divert/siphon off of public money from Reliance Home Finance Ltd (RHFL) and Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd (RCFL) through shell/paper companies which were operated and controlled by Reliance Anil Ambani group under the pretext of corporate loans by cheating banks, shareholders, investors and other public institutions”.RHFL had defaulted on more than Rs 7,500 crore, of which lender banks had recovered Rs 2,200 crore after resolution and the balance over Rs 5,300 crore constituted the proceeds of crime.
