Delhi’s Saket Court has listed a money laundering charge sheet filed by the ED against Al Falah Group Chairman Jawad Ahmad Siddiqui. The case pertains to alleged misrepresentation of NAAC accreditation to illegally collect student fees.
Delhi’s Saket Court on Saturday listed the money laundering charge sheet against Al Falah Group Chairman Jawad Ahmad Siddiqui and Al Falah Charitable Trust for consideration after hearing the Enforcement Directorate (ED) Submissions.
The Enforcement Directorate filed a chargesheet before a Delhi court on Friday.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sheetal Chaudhary Pradhan listed the matter for consideration after hearing submissions advanced by Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Simon Benjamin.
SPP for ED who appeared through video conferencing submitted that there is sufficient material to take cognisance of the charge sheet. There is a clear case of money laundering by the accused.
After hearing the submissions, the court listed the matter for hearing on January 31.
During the hearing, Jawad Ahmad Siddiqui was also present in the court.
Basis of the ED Investigation
According to the agency, the investigation was initiated based on two FIRs registered by the Delhi Police Crime Branch. The FIRs alleged that the university had falsely claimed accreditation from the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC).
The Enforcement Directorate has informed the court that it has provisionally attached assets as part of its probe under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
Earlier, the ED told the court that Siddiqui was arrested in connection with alleged money laundering involving the Al Falah Charitable Trust, which controls the university and its affiliated educational institutions.
The agency’s action followed the Crime Branch FIRs alleging that the university and its institutions falsely advertised expired NAAC accreditation grades.
Allegations of Fraud and Misrepresentation
The ED has further alleged that claims of regulatory recognition were fabricated to mislead students and parents, thereby inducing admissions and the collection of fees through misrepresentation.
The court recorded that the agency’s financial analysis indicated that funds collected during the relevant period appeared to be linked to the alleged misrepresentations, bringing them within the ambit of proceeds of crime under the PMLA.
Searches conducted at multiple locations led to the recovery of cash, digital devices, and financial records.
The ED told the court that certain contracts were allegedly diverted to entities linked to the accused’s family, and that senior officials confirmed Siddiqui’s role in approving major financial decisions. The agency also pointed to alleged layering of funds through related entities to obscure the money trail.
Court’s Stance on Custodial Remand
Granting custodial remand earlier, the court said ED interrogation was required to trace additional proceeds of crime, prevent dissipation of assets, and avoid tampering with records.
The court also noted the risk of influencing witnesses and the possible flight risk.
While Siddiqui’s counsel opposed the remand and claimed cooperation, the court held that custodial interrogation was justified given the seriousness of the allegations.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)