Mahira Group's Director remanded to ED custody for five days
Know about the legal proceedings surrounding Mahira Group's director, Sikander Singh Chhoker, in a money laundering case investigated by the ED.
image for illustrative purpose
A city court has decided to keep Sikander Singh Chhoker, a director of Mahira Group, in custody for five days under the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with a money laundering case. The ED is investigating allegations that the Chhoker family, including Dharam Singh Chhoker, a Congress MLA, misused funds collected from homebuyers for a Gurgaon real estate project.
Sikander was arrested by the ED on Tuesday and brought before the court on Wednesday. The ED argued that Sikander was uncooperative during the investigation, prompting the need for further interrogation to trace the money trail and identify other involved parties.
Mahira Group was supposed to construct about 1,500 houses on a 10-acre plot in Gurgaon's Sector 68, having collected approximately ₹360 crore from homebuyers. However, they failed to deliver the promised homes, and investigations revealed that over ₹100 crore was misappropriated.
Sikander's lawyer, Prashant Yadav, argued that Sikander had cooperated with the investigation, providing records on multiple occasions. He claimed that Sikander's arrest was rushed, especially considering that Dharam Singh had obtained relief from the Supreme Court.
On April 29, the ED attempted to declare Sikander a proclaimed offender, but the court rejected the request and issued a non-bailable warrant instead. Sikander was apprehended the following day.
Sessions judge Subhas Mehla granted the ED five days' custody of Sikander for further questioning. In an earlier attempt to halt the ED's investigation, Sikander had approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court, but his request was denied.
The ED's investigation began in January 2021 with a case registered against Mahira Infratech Ltd. and its directors for submitting fake bank guarantees to obtain a housing project license. Subsequently, more cases were registered against the company and its directors, with allegations of syphoning off funds by inflating construction costs and receiving cash payments from associated entities.
