NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on March 12 issued notice to Al Falah Group chairman Jawad Ahmad Siddiqui on a plea moved by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and sought his response.
ED has challenged the interim bail granted to Jawad Ahmed Siddique in a money laundering case. He was granted interim bail by the Saket court on the grounds of his wife’s medical condition.
Justice Saurabh Bannerjee issued notice to Jawad Ahmed Siddique and sought his response after hearing arguements advanced by the Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain for the ED assisted by Pranjal Tripathi.
The bench has listed the matter on March 19 for final hearing. Senior advocate Vikram Chaudhary appeared for Jawad Ahmed Siddique.
Advocate Zoheb Hossain argued that it is a serious case. Some of the accused named in the Delhi Blast case were working at the Al Falah University, Faridabad.
He should not be released on interim bail in this case as he is pressing bail in two cases lodged by the crime branch, Hossain submitted.
Senior advocate Vikram Chaudhary argued that Siddique’s wife is on a virtual deathbed. He was granted interim bail after considering the medical condition of his wife.
The bench suggested converting Siddique’s interim bail into custody parole, to which his counsel disagreed.
On February 7, the Saket court granted two weeks’ interim bail to Jawad Ahmed Siddique. His wife is suffering from cancer. She is undergoing treatment at Apollo Hospital.
The court had directed Siddiqui not to leave Delhi NCR without the court’s permission. He is also directed to surrender his passport to the investigation officer.
He is charge sheeted in a money laundering case linked with the Al Falah trust money laundering case.
Advocate Arshdeep Singh Khurana had appeared for Jawad Ahmed Siddique and argued that the investigation in the present matter, qua the accused/ applicant, is complete as the prosecution complaint has already been filed before the Court on 16.01.2026.
It was also argued that the accused/ applicant be granted interim bail for a period of four weeks.
It has also been argued that the accused, being the husband, is the primary caregiver and his support during the aforesaid ailment is required. It is argued that the parents of the accused/ applicant had already expired, and the wife of the accused is survived by old old-age mother, who is 75 years of age. (With inputs from ANI)
