In a social media post, she said the Congress had introduced recruitment legislation in the state in which provisions were made to stop paper leaks and corruption in recruitment.
The ED had initiated a PMLA investigation in the case based on an FIR filed by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) in Panchkula, Haryana against Parmar, an additional sessions judge-rank judicial officer who was suspended from his position.
According to the enforcement case information report (ECIR) filed by the ED on 13 June, which was based on an FIR filed by the ACB on 17 April, reliable information was received that Parmar, who was then posted as a special judge for CBI and ED cases in Panchkula, showed favouritism to Roop Kumar Bansal, his brother Basant Bansal (the owners of M3M), and Lalit Goyal (the owner of IREO Group), in exchange for undue advantage in the criminal cases of ED under PMLA and other cases of CBI pending against the aforementioned accused individuals in his court.
It was alleged Parmar received undue benefits through his relative Ajay Parmar. The FIR further mentioned that reliable information indicated instances of grave misconduct, abuse of official position, and acceptance of undue advantage from the accused individuals in the cases pending in his court.
Parmar’s nephew Ajay, however, filed an application on 6 July in the Panchkula PMLA court, claiming that the ECIR was not based on factual evidence. The application, which was dismissed by the court, stated that the allegations against Sudhir Parmar were false and fabricated, as the screenshots of WhatsApp chats and audio recordings were manipulated to frame the judge.
Parmar further alleged that both the ACB and the ED failed to verify the contents of the complaint before registering the FIR.
“The information, which is with the ACB, contains screenshots of WhatsApp chat between Sudhir Parmar and another person, through his own mobile phone as well as that of his nephew Ajay Parmar. In order to hype the case, the ACB alleged that ₹5-7 crore were demanded for helping the said owners of M3M in ED case. Allegations of giving favours to Lalit Goyal of IREO or any other person by Sudhir Parmar were false and based on presumptions. Lalit Goyal was produced before the court and remanded first to police custody first and then judicial custody. His bail application was also dismissed by Sudhir Parmar,’’ Ajay’s application said.