E-Paper
Court rejects gangster Ejaz Lakdawala’s plea seeking info on cases against Rana Kapoor
The special PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) court recently rejected the plea of gangster Ejaz Lakdawala seeking information related to the cases involving former Yes bank promoter Rana Kapoor. The court observed that Lakdawala had no locus to move such a plea
MUMBAI: The special PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) court recently rejected the plea of gangster Ejaz Lakdawala seeking information related to the cases involving former Yes bank promoter Rana Kapoor. The court observed that Lakdawala had no locus to move such a plea.
The gangster had raised a grievance that Kapoor was “running his office” illegally from the court premises.
Special judge MG Deshpande noted that none of the investigating agencies had submitted any report claiming that Kapoor was conducting his illegal office from court premises whenever he was produced for attending hearing dates. Besides, the court said there was absolutely no report from any agency that Kapoor’s presence in the court was detrimental to their case and the jail superintendent had not reported any illegal activity on the part of Kapoor.
Moreover, the court noted that prison authorities in their reply had claimed that Kapoor has seven cases pending against him and Lakdawala has some personal issues with Kapoor. The prison authorities claimed that both the accused should only be produced through video conferencing.
“Kapoor is facing multiple trials relating to economic offences and the record of each case is voluminous. He has to instruct his counsel, who cannot attend the jail wherein only 10 minutes are given to every prisoner to consult their lawyer,” the court said, adding that the matters wherein he has been facing trials are voluminous and certainly lawyers cannot be instructed within 10 minutes.
“In such a situation, whenever he makes request through his lawyer and the court feels it proper, it grants such permission to him and the applicant Lakdawala should not have any grudge about the same nor he has any locus standi to alleged as such,” the court said.
While rejecting the plea, the court observed that “what happens inside the jail is a matter to be dealt with by the jail superintendent and for that also the jail superintendent has not reported any illegal activity on the part of Kapoor. In such background, the applicant Lakdawala has absolutely no locus standi to send such application/letter and unnecessarily cause interference in the legal process of the court”.
Lakdawala had moved the court in March claiming that Kapoor was lodged in the same barrack with him in Taloja jail and that he had heard Kapoor saying that he bribed people to get his daily production before the court. Besides, he alleged that he runs his office from court premises when he is produced before the court from the prison for hearing of his cases.
In his reply, Kapoor has said that the allegations made by Lakdawala were baseless and hearsay. He has claimed that he was arrested in 2020 and for two years during the lockdown he was not produced before the court. Against the allegations of running the office, Kapoor said he only meets his family members—his wife and daughter—in the court along with his lawyers and his legal adviser.
