The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice on a plea filed by Unnati Fortune Holdings Ltd. (UFHL) promoter Anil Mithas challenging the Allahabad High Court’s refusal to grant him bail in a money laundering case involving the alleged diversion of ₹126.30 crore collected from homebuyers for the company’s Aranya project.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana issued notice and agreed to examine the builder’s challenge on merits.
Mithas had approached the apex court after the Allahabad High Court rejected his bail application on September 16, observing that the allegation of diversion of funds collected from homebuyers was supported by an independent audit report.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has alleged that UFHL funds collected as advances from homebuyers were diverted through investments in equity, preference shares, debentures and bonds, besides loans and advances to related entities. According to the agency, the alleged diversion took place between 2011 and 2019.
The investigation pertains to funds collected for the Aranya project. The ED has alleged that the company collected approximately ₹522.90 crore from homebuyers for 1,468 units, but possession was delivered to only 35 allottees. An independent audit reportedly identified a diversion of ₹107 crore, while the agency has alleged that ₹126.30 crore constituted proceeds of crime.
Opposing the bail plea before the High Court, the prosecution relied on the alleged diversion of homebuyers’ funds and the findings of the audit. The High Court also took note of delays in the trial proceedings, observing that the conduct of the applicant’s counsel had contributed to the adjournments.
Mithas had argued that the funds were utilised for business purposes, that he had cooperated with the investigation and that his prolonged incarceration warranted bail.
Rejecting the plea, the High Court held that the case did not merit the grant of bail in view of the allegations and the material placed before it. It also directed the trial court to proceed with the case expeditiously and avoid unnecessary adjournments.
The High Court clarified that its observations while deciding the bail application would not influence the adjudication of the case on merits.
The proceedings before the Supreme Court arise under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The apex court’s issuance of notice marks the next stage in Mithas’s challenge to the denial of bail; it does not, by itself, amount to a grant of bail or a finding on the merits of the allegations.
Case: Anil Mithas v. Directorate of Enforcement
Proceeding: Challenge to rejection of bail in a money laundering case involving alleged diversion of ₹126.30 crore.
The post Supreme Court seeks ED’s response to UFHL promoter Anil Mithas’s bail plea in ₹126.30-crore money laundering case appeared first on India Legal.