Delhi Court reserves order on ED's chargesheet against Supertech's RK Arora

New Delhi: Delhi's Patiala House Court on Monday reserved the order on cognizance point on the prosecution complaint (chargesheet) filed by Enforcement Directorate (ED) against Supertech's chairman and Promoter R K Arora, in relation to a money laundering case. 
The Additional Sessions Judge Devender Kumar Jangala on Monday decided to keep the order after the conclusion of the arguments made by ED's Special Public Prosecutors Naveen Kumar Matta and Manish Jain in the matter.
The Court fixed September 26, 2023, for the passing of the order. 
Meanwhile, Advocate RK Handoo appeared for RK Arora and moved the default bail plea in the matter. 
Recently, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed a prosecution complaint (chargesheet) against Supertech's Chairman, RK Arora in relation to a money laundering case in Delhi's Patiala House Court. 
Arora was arrested on June 27 under the criminal sections of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Last week, Delhi High Court dismissed the plea moved by Arora challenging grounds of arrest.
Court said, in the present case, the grounds of arrest were duly given and notified to the petitioner and he endorsed the same in writing under his signature. The core issue is of being “informed” and “as soon as”.
It if has been duly notified and brought to the notice at the time of arrest and further disclosed in detail in the remand application, it amounts be duly informed and served, said the Court. 
Earlier, ED apprised the court that 26 FIRs were registered by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), Delhi Police; Haryana Police and UP Police against Supertech Limited and its group companies under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) read with 406(criminal breach of trust)/420 (cheating)/467/471 IPC having allegations of cheating at least 670 home buyers for an amount of Rs 164 crore. 
ED also alleged that the amount collected by Supertech Ltd. was diverted to their group companies for the purchase of properties and the company with land having much lesser value. 
ED alleged that the accused persons have acquired properties, and made illegal/wrongful gain arising out of the said proceeds of crime by involving, indulging and commissioning criminal activities related to scheduled offences. 
It is stated that the prima facie case for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of the PML Act has been made.