A Special Court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in Panchkula, has dismissed the bail application of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Deepak Singla in a bank fraud case.Singla, AAP’s Goa in-charge who contested the Vishwas Nagar constituency in Delhi in 2020 and 2025, was arrested on May 18.On May 8, 2018, the CBI registered an FIR for bank fraud based on a complaint by Oriental Bank of Commerce (OBC). It was alleged that M/s Mahesh Timber Private Limited had established a wholly owned subsidiary in Singapore, which was availing credit facilities from banks there, backed by standby letters of credit issued by the Consortium of Banks in India.According to the CBI, the company, in conspiracy with private persons, fraudulently enhanced Foreign Letters of Credit (FLCs), resulting in a wrongful loss of approximately Rs 155.21 crores to OBC. During the investigation, it was found that, the principal outstanding amount against the company was Rs 239.46 crore. A charge sheet was filed on August 10, 2020.The Enforcement Directorate (ED) also recorded an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) in the matter on September 5, 2019. It alleged that the accused, in conspiracy with a senior OBC manager, inflated FLCs to Rs.173.03 crore against the original value of Rs.21.47 crore. Further investigation revealed that forged bills of entry, bills of lading and other import documents were allegedly used to siphon off funds.The ED told the court that Singla is the brother of co-accused Raman Singla, director of Amazon Exports Pte Ltd (a shell firm), and the nephew of main accused Ashok Kumar Mittal, a director of Mahesh Timber Private Limited.It claimed that Deepak Singla actively participated in the alleged conspiracy relating to fraudulent enhancement of FLCs, generation of proceeds of crime and their subsequent laundering through interconnected firms and layered financial transactions.“Deepak Singla held directorial and managerial positions in various entities linked with the fraud, including M/s Mahesh Timber Private Limited and M/s Traffic Media India Private Limited,” said the ED.The agency further alleged that Rs 2.82 crore was transacted in a circular manner through accounts linked to Deepak Singla and co-accused Ashok Mittal, in a “structured manner designed to disguise the beneficial ownership and criminal origin of the funds.”During a search operation at Deepak Singla’s premises, the ED recovered Rs 25 lakh in cash and SGD 6,000 on May 18. He was remanded to ED custody on May 20. His arrest and remand have been challenged before the Punjab and Haryana High Court.Rs 143 crore is yet to be tracedOpposing bail, ED Special Public Prosecutor Harneet Singh Oberoi argued that approximately Rs 143 crore, which had been siphoned off, remained to be traced, and that, in the given circumstances, further investigation was not only necessary but “imperative for a just and fair determination of the matter.”The court was told that, while recording the statement in custody, Deepak Singla made evasive denials to 150 of 165 queries. He intentionally did not provide the password for his seized mobile, which the ED believes contains incriminating material.High-value transactions remain unexplainedThe court was further told that there was no explanation for the Rs 60 lakh received into Deepak Singla’s account from Ragni Shyam, which was subsequently transferred to Traffic Media India Private Limited. Similarly, Rs. 1.05 crore was credited to his account by Kayo International, operated by Singla’s wife, and was subsequently transferred to Jai Durga Enterprises, which was under the control of the co-accused in the case.Singla remained evasive about Rs 1.41 crore credited to his account by Jai Durga Enterprises, the ED claimed.Counsel for Deepak Singla argued that the investigation had been under way for nearly eight years and that the material relied upon by the ED had long been available to the agency. It was claimed that Singla’s arrest after such a delay was unjustified, particularly when the other accused, who held an equal or higher role, had not even been arrested.However, on June 6, the Special Court held that the ED had left further investigation open in its prosecution complaint and supplementary complaint, and that this aspect would not entitle Singla to bail.