Benoy Babu was playing key role in L1 licence to IndoSpirits through PRI: ED to Delhi HC

New Delhi, May 4 (IANS) The Enforcement Directorate (ED) told the Delhi High Court, as it heard the bail plea of Hyderabad-based businessman and excise policy case accused Benoy Babu on Thursday, that he allegedly played a key role in giving L1 licence to IndoSpirits through Pernod Ricard India (PRI) on directions of AAP communication in-charge Vijay Nair.

Appearing for the ED, Special Public Prosecutor Zoheb Hossain said: "He is neck deep in the conspiracy. He has the requisite mens rea."

"Benoy Babu, in a criminal conspiracy, was making IndoSpirits part of PRI for the wholesale business of liquors."

Appearing before the bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma, he said that for proceeds of crime to be there, the property is to be derived directly or indirectly by any person as a result of criminal activity and that today the proceeds of crime are there.

"He was instrumental in appointing IndoSpirits as L1," Hossain said.

After noting the submissions, Justice Sharma listed the matter for hearing next week.

Babu, who worked as a general manager with the liquor firm Pernod Ricard, moved the high court in February.

The agency had arrested him on November 10 last year.

A Delhi court on February 16 had rejected Babu's bail plea with four others.

The four others, who were denied bail by the Special Judge of Rouse Avenue Courts M.K. Nagpal, are Abhishek Boinpally, Sarath Chandra Reddy, Sameer Mahendru, and Nair.

While denying bail, Nagpal had said that the method adopted by the five persons for committing the offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) makes up for sufficient incriminating evidence.

As the ED has already levelled serious allegations of tampering evidence against them, the court said that it will also be not possible to hold that the accused persons will not try to tamper evidence in case they are released on bail.

"Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances and the above discussion, this court is of the considered opinion that none of the applicants/accused deserves to be released on bail in this case at this stage of proceedings, as the allegations levelled against them are quite serious and relate to commission of an economic offence of money-laundering defined by Section 3 and made punishable by Section 4 of the PMLA. Hence, their bail applications are being dismissed," the court had observed.