Coal pilferage case: Court sends I-PAC director Vinesh Chandel to 14-day judicial custody

# News Desk
Vinesh Chandel, I-PAC director, arrested by ED in connection with the West Bengal coal scam, amid ₹20 crore money trail and alleged Goa link under investigation.
Vinesh Chandel, I-PAC director, arrested by ED in connection with the West Bengal coal scam, amid ₹20 crore money trail and alleged Goa link under investigation.

New Delhi: A Delhi court on Thursday sent I-PAC Director and co-founder Vinesh Chandel to 14 days’ judicial custody till May 7 in a money laundering probe linked to an alleged coal pilferage case.

Chandel has approached the Patiala House Court seeking regular bail. Additional Sessions Judge Dhirendra Rana issued notice on the plea and directed the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to file its response. The matter is listed for arguments on April 29.

The development follows the conclusion of the ED’s 10-day custody of Chandel, granted earlier by the court. He was produced before the court on April 23 after the custody period ended.

Court notes compliance with PMLA provisions

In its earlier order granting ED custody, the court observed that the agency complied with statutory requirements under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) at the time of arrest. It recorded that copies of the arrest order, grounds of arrest and related documents were furnished to Chandel with acknowledgement and forwarded to the Adjudicating Authority.

The court noted compliance with Sections 19(1), 19(2) and 19(3) of the PMLA, stating that procedural safeguards were followed.

ED allegations on fund routing and deleted records

Referring to material on record, the court took note of ED allegations that Chandel was involved in routing funds through informal channels, including hawala, with certain transactions conducted outside the formal banking system.

The agency also claimed that statements made during the investigation were inconsistent with the material collected, and that dealings with multiple entities lacked a clear legitimate business purpose.

Further, the court recorded ED’s allegation that certain electronic records and emails were deleted after search proceedings, which could have impacted the investigation. It observed that these aspects required deeper examination.

The court had found custodial interrogation necessary to trace the proceeds of crime, identify other persons involved and prevent possible evidence tampering.