The Delhi High Court on Tuesday, October 29, granted bail to Ankush Jain and Vaibhav Jain, co-accused with Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Minister Satyendar Kumar Jain in a money laundering case.

A single-judge bench led by Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri announced, “Bail granted, in both cases.”

Earlier, on October 18, the Rouse Avenue Court had also granted bail to Satyendar Jain, an AAP leader and former Delhi minister, in the same money laundering case. Allegations against him involved laundering funds through four companies purportedly linked to him.

At a previous hearing, Senior Advocate Siddharth Aggarwal represented Vaibhav Jain, while Advocate Rebecca John represented Ankush Jain. Citing the trial court’s decision, Aggarwal argued that Vaibhav Jain had been detained since June 30, 2022, amounting to 23 months in custody. He referenced Special Judge Vishal Gogne’s findings, which observed that the trial had yet to begin and was likely to face prolonged delays. The judge concluded, “Considering the delay in trial and long incarceration of 18 months, and the fact that the trial will take long to start, let alone conclude, the accused is favourably suited for the relief.”

In support of Ankush Jain’s bail, Advocate Rebecca John highlighted the recent Supreme Court decision granting bail to Abhishek Boinpally in the liquor scam case on grounds of parity, noting that other accused individuals had also been granted bail.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) opposed the bail applications, contending that Ankush and Vaibhav Jain knowingly misrepresented Satyendar Jain’s movable assets as their own to disguise the alleged proceeds of crime. The ED initiated its investigation after the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) filed an FIR against Satyendar Jain and others under the Indian Penal Code and Prevention of Corruption Act, subsequently attaching assets worth Rs. 4.81 crores linked to Jain and his family. The agency alleged that while in public office, companies owned by Jain received substantial funds through shell companies via a hawala network.

**Background:**

The Supreme Court had previously noted that Satyendar Jain, along with associates Ankush and Vaibhav Jain, appeared prima facie involved in money laundering offenses. The court highlighted the defendants’ inability to meet the dual bail conditions set out in Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Earlier, the High Court had denied Satyendar Jain’s petition for regular bail, citing statements from co-accused that implicated him as the operation’s mastermind, raising concerns about his potential influence and risk of evidence tampering if released.