Excise policy case: Delhi HC extends Benoy Babu’s interim bail on humanitarian grounds
New Delhi, Sep 6 (IANS) The Delhi High Court on Wednesday extended the interim bail of excise policy case accused Benoy Babu on humanitarian grounds till September 19.
Pernod Ricard India official Babu, who is an accused in a money laundering caserelated to the allegedexcisepolicy scam, moved the High Court challenging Delhi’s Rouse Avenue court’s Special Judge, M.K. Nagpal’s order denying him extension of interimbail.
Theinterimbail was initially granted for two weeks starting from August 26 for his daughter’s surgery related to a sinus problem. He was directed to surrender at Tihar jail on September 9.
Even though Nagpal had denied Babu interimbailextension, he had permitted him to make two video calls of 30 minutes each every week to his family for four weeks onhumanitariangrounds.
It was prayed before Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma forinterimbail to be extended claiming that Babu’s minor daughters have been suffering from depression for the last few months and he could take care of his children if granted the extension.
The judge while extendinginterimbailclarified that since the relief is purely on “humanitariangrounds”, no further extension ofinterimbailshall be sought on the ground of the medical condition of his daughters.
Appearing for Babu, senior advocates Vikas Pahwa and Mohit Mathur urged the court to extend the relief by three weeks on humanitariangrounds, and said that he was asking for extension only on account of the medical condition of his children.
“Nowadays many children die by suicide under stress,” Mathur said while seeking the relief.
On the other hand, The Enforcement Directorate (ED)’s counsel Zoheb Hossain took objection to the plea saying that interimbail cannot be extended on this ground and if it is done, others will also ask for relief on suchgrounds.
On Monday, Nagpal had deniedinterimbailextension stating that Babu was involved in a seriouscaseand dismissed his application seeking a three-week extension ofbailon thegroundsof his daughter’s medical condition.
The judge had observed that his daughter’s surgery had already been performed, and that the prescription slips for his daughter did not warrant an extension ofinterimbail.
The ED had opposed the request for an extension, arguing that it was an attempt to prolong hisbail.