Deepak Kochhar, the husband of former ICICI Bank CEO Chanda Kochhar, who was recently brought to Delhi from Mumbai by a team of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in a money laundering case, has met his lawyer Vijay Aggarwal at its Khan Market headquarter here following court directions.
A Mumbai court had sent Deepak Kochhar to ED custody till September 19 in connection with the money laundering case related to the alleged misappropriation in the loans granted by the ICICI Bank to Videocon. However, he was also allowed to have several meetings with his lawyer.
Advocate Vijay Aggarwal had met Deepak Kochhar in Delhi on September 10 for legal guidance in the matter and is again slated to meet with him on Monday.
The ED team had brought him to Delhi to confront him with voluminous documents and other materials collected during raids at his office.
Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh and advocate Naveen Kumar Matta, representing the ED, had submitted that throughout the course of the investigation, Deepak had remained evasive and non-cooperative.
“For the same reason, investigation on certain crucial aspects of the case is still ongoing. Deepak Kochhar has deliberately not provided crucial documents/ leads and taken stands contradictory to the records, on one pretext or another, deliberately misled the ED,” the lawyers had submitted before the court.
The stand of Deepak Kochhar on certain crucial aspects is contrary to the records of the case, despite being provided with ample opportunities to rebut the same, the lawyer said adding that he also willfully withheld the information which was in his exclusive knowledge.
The ED has also said that there was material in possession and reasons to believe that the Deepak Kochhar is guilty of the offences of money laundering as defined under sections of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
The economic offences watchdog had said that Deepak Kochhar is involved in the laundering of the proceeds of crime and has been involved in projecting the proceeds of crime as untainted.
It said that he directly attempted to indulge, knowingly assist, is knowingly a party and is actually involved in process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime and projecting it as untainted property.
He is in fact owning and continuing to enjoy the proceeds of crime generated from the criminal activity related to the scheduled offences in this case, the ED had said.