Weapon dealer Sanjay Bhandari opposes Ed

Sanjay Bhandari’s file pictures. |Picture source: Special arrangement

High-profile weapons dealer Sanjay Bhandari opposes Ed’s request before a Delhi court attempts to announce a “fugitive” in connection with the black money case and claims his stay in the UK is legal as he was rejected by the London High Court.

The English court cited the London HC’s order in Bhandari case on April 11 to deny extradition of the Indian government’s request to extradite another defendant in a suspected multimillion-dollar rice purchase scam.

Mehul Choksi, a fugitive recently arrested in Belgium, also reportedly cited the HC order against his extradition trial related to the so-called 130 million Punjab National Bank fraud.

Bhandari’s name also emerged in the ongoing investigation by the Enforcement Bureau, a money laundering case against Robert Vadra, the brother-in-law of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi.

The High Court in London, England, allowed Bhandari to appeal his extradition in February to face alleged tax evasion and money laundering charges, claiming he was in Tihar Par.

The British High Court also dismissed a petition filed by the Government of India (GOI) earlier this month, demanding an appeal to its order in the UK Supreme Court.

“Born by judgment of British courts”

Bhandari filed the submission with the court on April 19 through his attorney, citing here the ruling of Special Judge Sanjeev Aggarwal, claiming that “his client’s accommodation cannot be called illegal in the UK because he has the legal right to live in the UK, and Goi is subject to a judgment from the British court.

Bhandari’s lawyer and senior advocate Maninder Singh claimed that Ed’s application was “vague, misplaced and had no jurisdiction because it did not meet the requirements of the Fugitive Offenders Act”.

Singh further claimed that under the Fugitive Act, the value of planned crimes (the black money case against Bhandari in the current matter) must be 1,000 crore or more to declare a person “fugitive”.

However, when ED filed an application for application, they did not provide such an assessment from the income tax department and the court was mistakenly believed that the crime involved was worth more than Rs 100 crore.

“In addition, according to the income tax department itself, according to the lawsuits in the Delhi High Court, the cases filed by Bhandari in the withdrawal proceedings filed in March 2020, involved the crimes worth less than Rs 1,000 crore,” the lawyer said.

Furthermore, regarding the warrant for the unbailable arrest based on his arrest in the UK, he has been fired under the judgment of the British High Court, with no new warrant against him.

The Delhi court seeks Ed’s rebuttal to Bandari’s arguments by May 3, when the judge will further hear the matter.

“Bhandari’s detailed arguments on the application, the arguments made by the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, representing Article 4 (declares of the Fugitive Economic Offenders).

“At this stage, the SPP of the Emergency Room (Special Prosecutor) seeks some time to resolve the arguments against refuted…not objection. Time granted for the benefit of justice. In this case, the arguments against refuted were raised in the above ED application on May 3,” the judge argued on April 19 in the above 19 application on May 3. ”

The British High Court allowed Bhandari to appeal on human rights grounds.

The court also ordered the “release” from the extradition order of then-UK Home Secretary Suella Braverman to face criminal proceedings in India under a November 2022 Westminster District Court ruling.