The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court rejected Abbas Ansari’s bail plea in connection with the money laundering case. Justice Jaspreet Singh, presiding over the bench, based the decision on the evidence presented by the ED, including flow charts that demonstrated the origin and movement of funds into Ansari’s accounts. The court concluded that Ansari was not entitled to bail at this stage
![[ MLA Abbas Ansari in Money Laundering Case] Allahabad HC's Lucknow Bench Denies Bail](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/MicrosoftTeams-image-26.png?resize=414%2C227&ssl=1)
Prayagraj: On May 9th: The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court denied bail to Mau MLA Abbas Ansari in relation to a money laundering case. The court, presided over by Justice Jaspreet Singh, based its decision on the money trail presented by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against Ansari.
READ ALSO: BREAKING | SC Grants Bail to Abbas Ansari for Attendance at Mukhtar Ansari’s ‘Fatiha’
The court emphasized the importance of the evidence provided, including flow charts that clearly outlined the origin of funds and their transfer into the accused Ansari’s accounts. Considering this substantial material, the court concluded that Ansari is not eligible for bail at this stage.
“Based on the evidence presented, including detailed flow charts outlining the origin and path of the funds into the accounts of the accused Ansari, this court concludes that bail is not warranted at this juncture.”
The court’s order also highlighted the connection between Ansari and the movement of funds involving two firms, namely M/s Vikas Construction and M/s Aaghaaz. The ED has alleged that Ansari employed these firms for money laundering activities.
The ED had initiated a case against Ansari, a member of the Suheldev Bharatiya Samaj Party (SBSP) and an MLA representing Mau, under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The case was based on three previous cases. Ansari was implicated in this particular case on November 4, 2022.
During the proceedings, senior Supreme Court advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Ansari, contended that the ED had failed to establish a money trail linking the accused with the firms in question. Sibal argued that Ansari had been falsely implicated due to ulterior motives.
“This plea lacks credibility given Ansari’s dual roles as a Legislative Assembly member and a national-level sportsman. The lack of clarity regarding the funding he received, including contributions from relatives for his sporting and political endeavors, is concerning and undermines trust.”
Dismissing Sibal’s arguments, the court made a noteworthy observation. It noted that despite Ansari’s status as a member of the Legislative Assembly and a national-level sportsman, he claimed ignorance regarding the source and amount of funds received from his relatives for his sporting and political pursuits. The court found this claim to be lacking credibility.
Abbas Ansari is the son of the late gangster-politician Mukhtar Ansari, who was in Banda jail and passed away earlier this year due to a cardiac arrest.
Background
Abbas Ansari, son of convicted criminal Mukhtar Ansari, faces controversy for allegedly acquiring firearms improperly. The case against him was initiated with a first information report (FIR) in October 2019, which detailed that Ansari allegedly transferred his gun license from Lucknow to Delhi without the requisite notification to the concerned police authorities. Furthermore, he is accused of using licenses from two different states under separate identities.
The FIR disclosed that despite Ansari’s Lucknow gun license expiring in October 2015, he obtained a new one in New Delhi by June 2017, purchasing seven firearms afterward. In November 2023, the Allahabad High Court denied bail due to the discovery of weapons and ammunition, including “metal jacketed” bullets, at Ansari’s New Delhi residence, raising concerns about his involvement in illegal activities, given his history of eight cases.
Despite these allegations, Ansari’s legal team moved to the Supreme Court, challenging the High Court’s decision. During the proceedings, Ansari’s counsel argued that he has been unjustly implicated and highlighted his prolonged detention since November 2022. They contended that the case required no oral evidence and that the chargesheet had already been filed.
Te counsel representing the Uttar Pradesh government presented a different narrative, accusing Ansari of issuing threats to kill police and jail officials. This accusation prompted Justice Gavai to express concerns about the conduct of the Uttar Pradesh Police, referencing a separate incident to illustrate potential misconduct within the force.
READ PREVIOUS REPORTS ON ABBAS ANSARI
