SC asks Nirav Modi's brother-in-law to seek statements of accounts probed by CBI from banks

The Supreme Court on Monday asked Mainak Mehta the brotherinlaw of fugitive diamantaire Nirav Modi who is an accused in the Punjab National Bank PNB fraud case to write to the banks where his accounts have been probed by the CBI and seek the statements of transactionsMehta told the court that his bank accounts including those in Singapore were frozen following a moneylaundering probe launched by the EDA bench of justices D Y Chandrachud and Hima Kohli told Mehtas counsel Amit Desai that his client should write to the banks requesting for the statements of transactions for the period sought to be probed by the CBIThe bench said the details of all the communication with the banks should be shared with the investigating agencyRepresenting the Central Bureau of Investigation CBI Additional Solicitor General S V Raju said even if the accounts are frozen it does not preclude Mehta from seeking bank statements for the period being probed by the federal agencyAlso read Kejriwal targets BJP on Morbi bridge crash seeks mandate for AAP in Guj pollsThe bench said it will allow Mehta to travel abroad once he furnishes the bank statements and posted the matter for hearing on November 14The court was hearing a CBI plea challenging an August 23 order of the Bombay High Court that allowed Mehta to travel to Hong Kong and stay there for three monthsOn October 18 the top court had asked the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate ED to sit together within a week and share material with regard to the money transactions and disclosures made by Mehta with each otherIt had also asked Mehta to share with the CBI whatever relevant information he has on the bank accounts being investigated by the agencyThe CBI had earlier flagged issues with regard to the nondisclosure of transactions in bank accounts including one based in Singapore two transactions of USD 89 million and USD 18 million transferred by Modis fatherThe agency had said Mehta should share the details with it after which he might be considered for travelling abroadThe top court had earlier noted that on October 13 2021 a notice was issued under section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure CrPC directing Mehta to appear before the additional superintendent of police CBI in Mumbai with documents related to his bank account in Singapore as well as with the statement and other details of an account in the name of Pavilion Point Corporation a company controlled by Mehta on October 25 2021The CBI has submitted that Mehta is a British citizen who has given certain details but not made full disclosures with regard to the said bank accounts and there is apprehension that he may not return to IndiaIt has pointed out that an amount of USD 30 million was sent by Modi which has allegedly been diverted by Mehta and said it needs to know the details in this regardDesai had earlier submitted that his client had made a disclosure of the records that were available with him to the ED but could not furnish the complete details as his bank accounts were frozenWe have given whatever details that were available with us The ED has investigated the USD 30 million transaction and found that we were not the beneficiarySimilarly it has also investigated all other transactions and therefore the agency did not oppose the pardon granted by the court the senior advocate had saidMehta has turned an approver in the ED case and received pardonDesai had submitted that Mehta would immediately call on the CBIs investigating officer and indicate what steps have been taken to provide the information referred to in a notice dated October 13 2021He had submitted that the trial court had pardoned Mehta as due to his efforts the ED was able to bring back more than Rs 500 crore to the countryOn August 23 the high court had dismissed the CBIs plea against an order of a special court dealing with cases lodged under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act PMLA that allowed Mehta to travel to Hong Kong The CBI wanted the PMLA courts order to be stayedThe agency had submitted in the high court that Mehta was not named as an accused in the case and his role in the PNB scam was yet to be ascertained for which he needed to be interrogatedIt has claimed that Mehta had received a large sum of money siphoned off in the PNB fraud The money it has alleged was transferred to his wifes accountThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever