{"id":371997,"date":"2020-09-05T10:10:15","date_gmt":"2020-09-05T04:40:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/?p=371997"},"modified":"2020-09-05T10:25:34","modified_gmt":"2020-09-05T04:55:34","slug":"agusta-westland-case-delhi-hc-defers-hearing-on-ed-plea-to-cancel-saxena-bail","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/agusta-westland-case-delhi-hc-defers-hearing-on-ed-plea-to-cancel-saxena-bail\/","title":{"rendered":"Agusta Westland case: Delhi HC defers hearing on ED plea to cancel Saxena bail"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>THE DELHI High Court Friday deferred hearing of the Enforcement Directorate\u2019s (ED) plea, seeking cancellation of bail to approver Rajiv Saxena in the AgustaWestland case as it was informed that the agency is in the process of challenging the earlier HC ruling which declined to revoke Saxena\u2019s status as approver at this stage. <\/p>\n<p>During the hearing of the ED petition seeking recall of his bail order, the counsel representing the agency sought adjournment of the case for two weeks. The single bench of Justice C Hari Kumar allowed the request. <\/p>\n<p>On June 8, HC had upheld the lower court order dismissing ED\u2019s plea for revocation of Saxena\u2019s status as approver. In 2019, the agency moved a plea for revocation, saying Saxena failed to disclose \u201cfull and true set of facts\/ circumstances in his knowledge\u201d.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>THE DELHI High Court Friday deferred hearing of the Enforcement Directorate\u2019s (ED) plea, seeking cancellation of bail to approver Rajiv Saxena in the AgustaWestland case as it was informed that the agency is in the process of challenging the earlier HC ruling which declined to revoke Saxena\u2019s status as approver at this stage. During the hearing of the ED petition seeking recall of his bail order, the counsel representing the agency sought adjournment of the case for two weeks. The single bench of Justice C Hari Kumar allowed the request. On June 8, HC had upheld the lower court order [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":40,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[130],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-371997","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-newspapers"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/371997","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/40"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=371997"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/371997\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=371997"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=371997"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/infralive.com\/web\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=371997"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}