• CBI summons Nirav Modi’s brother-in-law in connection with the Bank Fraud Case

    National
    CBI summons Nirav Modi’s brother-in-law in connection with the Bank Fraud Case

    The CBI and the ED have chargesheets in the Nirav Modi-Punjab National Bank case and are conducting investigations. color:black;mso-themecolor:text1">

    color:black;mso-themecolor:text1">Digital Desk: The brother-in-law of wanted diamond heiress
    Nirav Modi, Maiank Mehta, has received a summons from the Central Bureau of
    Investigation (CBI). The agency has requested that Mainak Mehta appears before
    them on August 1.



    color:black">In opposition to the order, the CBI has appealed a Mumbai special
    court's decision to permit Mehta to return to Hong Kong.



    Mehta was previously given
    permission to visit Hong Kong on June 16 by the special Prevention of
    Laundering Act (PMLA) court. Mehta is currently subject to a stay and is unable
    to leave the country due to the CBI's petition to the Bombay High Court
    (HC) challenging the June 16 order. The CBI and the ED have chargesheets
    in the Nirav Modi-Punjab National Bank case and are conducting investigations.



    Mehta said that he
    was simply an accused in the ED case, which is why he had come to Mumbai from
    Hong Kong in order to become an approver and tell the ED and the PMLA court
    what he knew about the multi-crore fraud.



    Mehta's attorney,
    Amit Desai, claimed in court on Friday that the CBI designated him an accused
    and summoned him at the time he became an Approver and was permitted to travel.



    Maiank Mehta Granted Protection
    From Action



    We have stated that he is
    a suspect, senior attorney Raja Thakare who is representing the CBI stated. As
    the inquiry is still ongoing and there are three options, I am unable to make
    any additional statements at this time. Mehta might be let go if there is no
    material. He can be made an accused if there is evidence against him. Or he can
    be appointed an approver if the information meets the criteria.



     



    Justice PD Naik's panel
    reviewed a division bench of the Bombay High Court ruling from July 25 that
    granted Mehta immunity from any CBI coercion and instructed him to appear at
    the CBI probe. Mehta asked for treatment as an approver in the CBI case as well
    because he had been appointed one in the ED case in his petition to the division
    bench.



    color:black">That means he is protected and told to attend, said Justice Amit
    Naik. The probe was to be completed quickly by the CBI. But it states that he
    is an accused person and that only an accused person may hold the position of the approver.



    Then Raja Thakare
    continued, "Our primary concern was that it would be difficult to track
    him down once he left the country. His brother-in-law Nirav Modi, who is still
    unavailable to stand prosecution here, has strengthened our suspicions.



    color:black">Mehta has a British passport and wants to go to Hong Kong, Thakare
    continued. His wife is a citizen of Belgium.



    color:black">After then, Justice Naik noted that this was true despite all of
    the CBI's concerns.



    color:black">"ED is not concerned in this way. You can always take legal
    action against Mehta if he refuses to be approved, remarked Justice Naik.



    The bench's decision on
    Friday "cannot override the division bench order passed on July 25 by
    which he has been ordered to be present," Thakare argued, adding that
    there is no guarantee that the man will return and that it will thereafter be
    very difficult to get him back.



    color:black">There should be no dispute between the orders of the two courts,
    Justice Naik agreed while stating.



    color:black">Desai then insisted that Mehta was going to return and that there
    was only a little window of a few weeks to be needed. Desai emphasized that he
    was willing to offer an undertaking and an itinerary.



    Justice Naik then advised
    the CBI to examine Mehta every day between August 1 and August 4, if necessary and kept the CBI motion for a subsequent hearing on August 4.



     



    Desai said that the ED
    should be named a party since they have a lot to say and that the CBI should
    have been made a party to the suit. The judge concurred and instructed CBI to
    revise its petition while giving ED notice to appear in court on August 4.