
HC denies immediate relief to Nirav Modi's sister, brother-in-law
The couple has turned approver in the money-laundering case launched by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), but the CBI in March filed a supplementary charge-sheet naming them as accused in its case.
Purvi and Mayank, both British citizens of Indian origin and residing in Hong Kong for the last 35 years, were granted pardon by the special PMLA court on January 4, 2021, in two ED complaints dated May 24, 2018, and February 28, 2019, against the prime conspirator Nirav Modi and various others. Thereafter, on September 7, 2021, they appeared before the special court, where all pending non-bailable warrants against them in the ED case were cancelled.
The special court, on account of the ED's acceptance, granted pardon to the couple and marked them as approvers. Accordingly, they are now bound to make a full disclosure of the offence to the best of their knowledge. The special court noted that the duo would be in a unique position to provide substantial and important evidence, information, proof, and documents relevant to Nirav Modi and his dealings. 'The information to be provided by them is crucial and significant. It will enable the court to effectively adjudicate the present case and help the prosecution in furtherance of their case against the other accused persons,' it stated.
On June 16, 2022, the couple was allowed to travel to Hong Kong for personal and professional obligations. However, the CBI, on June 30, 2022, intimated the court that it had named the petitioners as accused in its case and used the same grounds to request denial of their travel application. The couple contended that since they had already been granted pardon by the special PMLA court, they could not be arrayed as accused by the CBI at a belated stage in the same facts and circumstances.
Senior advocate Amit Desai, representing Purvi, stated that the investigation initiated against them by the CBI after a lapse of almost 4.5 years was wholly arbitrary. He added that the transaction sought to be investigated by the CBI had already been scrutinised in 2018 and in 2019 when the two chargesheets were filed.
'They were not named as accused in either the FIR or in the two chargesheets,' he said. 'The CBI suddenly decided that they should be named in the chargesheet. Purvi is assisting the Government of India with the recovery of assets outside the country. All statements are given under oath, which can now be used against her. She will be in fear and will not give evidence if protection is not granted to her.'
The division bench of Justices Sarang Kotwal and S M Modak stated, 'We will grant protection to you if we are convinced. But it is to be done only after hearing the other side. We will then consider.'
Purvi Modi was alleged to have diverted around ₹1201.18 crore (175.1 USD million). The chargesheet, submitted before the special CBI court on March 24, alleged that she was an active participant in the generation of proceeds of crime and the money laundering. It claimed that Purvi was a director in Dubai- and Hong Kong-based companies which received funds generated through fraudulent Letters of Undertakings (LoUs) obtained by Nirav Modi from the public-sector Punjab National Bank (PNB).
Purvi is already named as an accused in the charge sheet filed by the Enforcement Directorate in the money-laundering case. The CBI court is yet to take cognisance of the charge sheet.
Nirav Modi is the prime accused in the ₹13,850 crore fraud at PNB and was declared a fugitive economic offender in December 2019. Modi and his uncle, Mehul Choksi, are accused of defrauding PNB by obtaining fraudulent LoUs, enabling them to secure overseas loans without proper collateral.
The fraud, uncovered in 2018, allegedly involved officials from PNB's Brady House branch in Mumbai who issued the unauthorised LoUs to Modi's firms. The total loss to PNB was estimated at ₹6,498 crore. The transactions went unnoticed for several years due to the collusion of the bank officials. Modi, the mastermind behind the PNB scam, has been fighting his extradition process from the UK, where the authorities arrested him in 2019.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
a minute ago
- Time of India
ED files Fema case against Myntra for Rs 1,654 crore FDI violation
Myntra is accused of misusing the wholesale 'cash & carry' route to conduct multi-brand retail trading (MBRT), which is restricted under the FDI policy. The ED found that Myntra received foreign direct investment (FDI) claiming it was for wholesale trading, but routed the majority of sales through Vector E-Commerce Pvt Ltd, a related-party entity that sold directly to consumers. This structure was allegedly used to bypass norms by bifurcating B2B and B2C operations, while actually engaging in retail trade. As per the FDI policy amendments dated April 1, 2010, and October 1, 2010, only 25% of wholesale sales can go to group companies — a cap Myntra allegedly breached. The ED concluded that Myntra and others contravened Section 6(3)(b) of Fema, along with the consolidated FDI policies, resulting in a total contravention amounting to Rs 1,654.35 crore. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed a complaint under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (Fema), 1999, against Flipkart-owned fashion etailer Myntra, and its related entities for allegedly violating foreign investment rules to the tune of Rs 1,654.35 crore.


Economic Times
a minute ago
- Economic Times
ED files FEMA case against Myntra, linked firms for Rs 1,654 cr violation
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Wednesday filed a Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) case against e-commerce giant Myntra, along with associated companies and directors, for alleged violations involving over Rs 1,654 crore, officials confirmed. ADVERTISEMENT Last year, the central agency had conducted searches at some vendors operating on the platforms of Amazon and Flipkart for alleged violations of foreign exchange and foreign direct investment (FDI) rules. The agency had searched 19 premises across New Delhi, Bengaluru, Mumbai, Hyderabad and Panchkula (Haryana) at the 'main vendors of Amazon and Flipkart." ED had allegedly unearthed certain FEMA violations that are ordinarily civil offences and entail monetary penalties. (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)


Mint
a minute ago
- Mint
ED files complaint against Myntra and its directors for alleged FEMA offences worth over ₹1,645 crore
The Directorate of Enforcement's (ED) Bengaluru Zonal Office has on July 23, filed a complaint against Myntra Designs (Myntra), its related companies, and their Directors, under section 16(3) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) for alleged offences worth ₹ 1,654,35,08,981 (i.e. ₹ 1,654.35 crore). In an official release, the ED said its probe was based on what the agency called credible information that Myntra and its related companies allegedly conducted Multi Brand Retail Trade (MBRT) under the guise of 'Wholesale Cash & Carry', which violates the extant Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) policy. ED investigation under the provisions of FEMA, 1999 revealed that M/s. Myntra Designs Pvt. Ltd. had declared that they were engaged in the business of wholesale cash & carry and invited and received FDI from foreign investors equivalent to ₹ 1654,35,08,981/- and that they sold majority of their goods to M/s. Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd. (who sold the goods in retail to the ultimate customer). That M/s. Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Myntra Designs Pvt. Ltd are related parties and belong to same group or group of companies. M/s Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd. was created and continued to be used as corporate entity to bifurcate the B2C [(business to customer 1.e. Myntra Designs Pvt. Ltd. to retail customers)] transaction into B2B (Myntra Designs Pvt. Ltd. to Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd.) and then B2C (Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd. to retail customers), ED investigation also revealed that Myntra Designs Pvt. Ltd. was actually carrying out multi-brand retail trading in the guise of wholesale cash & carry. Even otherwise, Myntra Designs Pvt. Ltd. have not satisfied the condition laid down for "Wholesale/Cash & Carry Trading" as they have made cent per cent sales to Vector E-Commerce Pvt. Ltd which is in contravention of amendment dated 01.04.2010 and 01.10.2010 which permitted only 25% sale to companies belonging to the same group or group companies. Myntra Designs Pvt. Ltd. and others have contravened the provisions as per section 6(3)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 and Consolidated FDI Policy dated 01.04.2010 and Consolidated FDI Policy dated 01.10.2010 to the tune of Rs. 1654,35,08,981/- In view of the above, a complaint u/s 16 (3) of FEMA, 1999 is filed before the Adjudicating Authority under (This is a breaking story, more updates coming…)