IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
Kishore Bisure - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4055 OF 2024
Decided On : 12-02-2025
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Sections 3 and 4 - Bail application filed by Accused No. 2 for grant of bail after being incarcerated for 1 year 6 months 25 days - Allegations of involvement in fraudulent activities related to Covid-19 contracts - Applicant not named in FIR or ECIR, and allegations primarily based on statements of co-accused - Court finds no prima facie evidence of guilt and grants bail subject to conditions. (Paras 1, 2, 31, 32)
Facts of the case:
The Applicant was arrested by the ED in connection with alleged money laundering activities related to contracts awarded during the Covid-19 pandemic. The prosecution claims the Applicant facilitated fraudulent activities, but he was not named in the initial FIR or ECIR. (Paras 1, 3, 4)
Findings of Court:
The court noted that the Applicant had cooperated with the investigation and that the prosecution's case lacked substantial evidence. The Applicant's continued detention would violate his right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. (Paras 31, 32)
Issues: The main issues were whether the Applicant's continued incarceration was justified given the lack of evidence and the prolonged delay in trial proceedings. (Paras 22, 31)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Applicant's rights under Article 21 must be upheld, and that prolonged detention without trial is impermissible. The prosecution's reliance on co-accused statements without corroborating evidence was insufficient for continued detention. (Paras 26, 31)
Result: Bail granted subject to conditions. (Para 32)
JUDGEMENT :
[MILIND N. JADHAV, J.]
1. The present Application is filed by the Applicant – Accused No. 2, [Applicant is Accused No. 2 in the Prosecution Complaint filed by ED.] for grant of bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) read with Section 45 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short ‘PMLA’) in connection with ECIR No. ECIR/MBZO-1/63/2022 registered for offence under Section 3 and 4 of the PMLA.
2. Applicant was arrested by the Directorate of Enforcement (for short ‘ED’) on 19.07.2023. Applicant is incarcerated for 1 year 6 months 25 days. The Special Court rejected the bail Application preferred by the Application in Special PMLA Case No. 1500 of 2023 vide order dated 04.05.2024. Hence, the present Bail Application.
3. The predicate offence was registered on 24.08.2022 as FIR No. 0756 of 2022 with Azad Maidan Police Station, Mumbai for offences punishable under Sections 120B, 304A, 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 readwith 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’). On 12.10.2022 the case was transferred to Economic Offence Wing (for short ‘EOW’) Mumbai and renumbered as FIR No. 144 of 2022. Subsequently ECIR No. ECIR/MBZO-1/63/2022 was registered on 21.11.2022. Applicant was not named as Accused in the FIR and ECIR.
4. A complaint was lodged by one Member of Parliament alleging that during Covid-19 pandemic, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (for short ‘MCGM’) issued two Expressions of Interest (for short EOI) on 22.06.2023 and 25.06.2023 awarding contracts to various agencies including M/s. Lifeline Hospital Management Services Hospital Management Services for providing manpower supply to operate and manage ICU and general Units at Jumbo Covid Centres for the purpose of making treatment available to the citizens. Dr. Hemant Gupta, Sujit Mukund Patkar, Sanjay Madanlal Shah and Raju Salunke were its Partners.
5. A prima facie delay in filing the compliant is evident. Allegation in the complaint is that M/s. Lifeline Hospital Management Services, an entity established on 26.06.2020 with no prior experience in providing medical services was awarded a tender on the basis of its Partnership Deed of the same date. Further it is alleged that M/s. Lifeline Hospital Management Services failed to fulfill its contractual obligations, submitted fabricated invoices and generated fabricated bills for medical services purportedly provided to and in regard with the Jumbo Covid Centre and swindled approximately Rs. 38 Crores of public money. It is alleged that Applicant in his capacity as the Dean of Dahisar Jumbo Covid Center is alleged to have received monthly kickbacks to verify and forward the fabricated bills based on fake / fabricated attendance sheets of staff record facilitating these fraudulent activities.
6. Briefly stated prosecution case is as follows:-
7. Primary allegation is that M/s. Lifeline Hospital Management Services did not fulfill its contractual obligation under the contract as there was under-employment of staff members and provisions contrary to EOI conditions which were shown through fabricated attendance sheets and staff records at Dahisar Jumbo Covid Center and public money received from the MCGM against those bills / invoices which were fraudulently transferred to Service Provider Firms namely M/s. M.S. Consultancy of Ravikant Singh and M/s. Elegant Multiservices of Sanjay Parab which were created at the instance of Partners of M/s. Lifeline Hospital Management Services.
8. Second allegation is that M/s. Lifeline Hospital Management Services obtained contract for two Jumbo Centers at Worli- NSCI and Dahisar on the basis of a fabricated Partnership Deed.
9. Third allegation is that in connivance with BMC staff M/s. Lifeline Hospital Management Services managed to get the invoices/bills cleared and received an amount of Rs. 32,44,86,784.9/-.
10. Fourth allegation is that Applicant was appointed as a Dean at Dahisar Jumbo Covid Center for the period between 9th
AI
Prolonged detention without trial violates the right to a speedy trial under Article 21; mere reliance on co-accused statements without corroborating evidence is insufficient for continued incarcerat....
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates Article 21 rights; bail granted due to lack of prima facie evidence against the accused.
The right to bail is fundamental, and prolonged incarceration without trial violates Article 21, especially when the trial is unlikely to conclude in a reasonable time.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial violates constitutional rights, warranting bail under PMLA.
The court emphasized the right to a speedy trial and liberty, allowing bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act after 15 months of custody, citing no likelihood of trial commencement.
The right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution prevails, allowing bail under Section 436A of the CrPC despite statutory restrictions in the PMLA.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental under Article 21, and prolonged incarceration without trial infringes on this right, warranting bail despite serious allegations.
The right to bail prevails over statutory restrictions when prolonged incarceration without trial violates constitutional rights.
The court emphasized that in economic offences, especially under the PMLA, bail should not be granted unless the accused demonstrates they are not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.