Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
Jasmeet Singh, J.
Raman Bhuraria – Petitioner
versus
Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent
Bail Appln. 4330 of 2021 and
Crl.M.(Bail) 1514 of 2021
Decided on 8.2.2023
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – Sections 45 and 50 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 439 and 482 – Bail application – Allegations in FIR pertain to financial irregularity and siphoning of funds in relation to credit facilities obtained by SBFL from a consortium of banks led by SBI – If a person is charged under PMLA, he has to overcome twin conditions of Section 45(1)(ii) of PMLA – Twin conditions are independent of each other and require Court to weigh each one of them and adjudicate on potential guilt of offender – Court is not required to render a finding of guilt or acquittal at this stage, nor is it required to conduct a mini trial or meticulously examine evidence but rather is to examine whether applicant has made out reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty – ED has also not been able to prima facie show excepts averments show that applicant was directly involved in creation of forged documents – Retracted statements cannot form basis of guilt of applicant – There is not satisfactory explanation given by ED for lack of documents that directly point to applicant as mastermind – Court cannot let applicant undergo long period of detention – Continuing pre-trial incarceration will amount to deprivation of personal liberty as well as travesty of justice – There are no criminal antecedents – Period of incarceration as well as delay in investigation along with any reliable material which directly involved Applicant justifies prima facie release on bail – Bail granted. (Paras 42, 43, 44, 52, 53, 59,
62, 66, 68, 70 and 74)
Result: Application allowed. Bail granted.
JUDGMENT
Jasmeet Singh, J.—
Bail Appln. 4330/2021
The present application is filed under Section 439 IPC read with Section 482 CrPC seeking bail in ECIR/12/DLZO-I/2021 dated 30.01.2021.
2. The applicant was arrested on the night of 12/13.08.2021 at 00:45 hrs. in the abovementioned ECIR, and thereafter remanded to Police Custody (PC) of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for a period of 14 days until 25.08.2021.
3. Thereafter, the applicant has been remanded to Judicial Custody (JC) from time to time and continues to remain incarcerated in Judicial Custody in Tihar Jail, Delhi.
4. The applicant had previously preferred two regular bail applications before the learned Trial Court and both have been rejected vide orders dated 05.10.2021 and 01.11.2021 respectively.
5. The brief facts giving rise to filing of the present bail application are as under:—
6. On 31.12.2020, the CBI registered a FIR bearing No. RC0742020E0014 against M/s Shakti Bhog Foods Ltd. (hereinafter called as SBFL) and Mr. Kewal Krishan Kumar, Director/Promoter of M/s SBFL under Section 120B read with Section 420/ 467/ 468/ 471 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter called as PC Act).
7. The FIR was registered based on a written complaint dated 11.06.2020 lodged by the State Bank of India (SBI). The allegations in the FIR pertain to financial irregularity and siphoning of funds in relation to credit facilities obtained by SBFL from a consortium of banks led by the SBI and thereby causing a loss of Rs.3269.42 crores.
8. The Ld counsel for the applicant states that the applicant was not named as an accused/ suspect in the FIR. As per the FIR, the review period/period under enquiry of offence was between 2013 and 2017.
9. The applicant was an internal auditor of the SBFL for the financial year 2008-09 till 2013-14, and a statutory auditor of SBFL for the financial year 2006-07.
10. In the column No.12 of the FIR, the observations of the I.O. read as under:—
| 12. | Action taken by the bank against public servants including departmental proceedings initiated. If so, details thereof. | I. | The account turned NPA on account of inventory losses due to steep fall in paddy prices, underutilisation of Capex in rice/ paddy segment made in the last two years, Delay in tie up funds (PE investment) to tide over the losses. |
|
|
| II. | There is no apparent malafides in the monitoring of the account, though some minor omissions/ instances of negligence has been observed in Credit Audit Reports, these have not contributed in the account turning NPA. The company’s operations were under considerable stress owing to various internal and external factors. |
11. It is submitted that the findings of the I.O. clearly show that the account of SBFL was declared NPA on account of commercial reason and, more importantly, there are no apparent mala fides in the monitoring of the account though there are some omissions/ instances of negligence.
12. Based upon the FIR, the respondent Enforcement Directorate (ED) filed the ECIR in which the applicant was not named as an accused.
13. It is further submitted that before the learned ACMM, the respondent ED on 25.01.2022 has made a statement that it needed two and a half months for completing its investigation. Thereafter, on 22.04.2022, the respondent requested for and was granted more time to complete its investigation.
14. It is also submitted that the “triple test” for grant of bail laid down by various judgments are as under:—
(i) Flight risk
(ii) Influencing any witness
(iii) Tampering with evidence.
15. The learned Sessions Court in its order dated 18.11.2021 has given all 3 findings in favour of the applicant which have not been challenged by the respondent.
16. The order dated 18.11.2021 records as under:—
“11. So fa
Bail – Retracted statements cannot form basis of guilt of applicant – Continuing pre-trial incarceration will amount to deprivation of personal liberty as well as travesty of justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty of the offense of money laundering under PMLA 2002, and the court's r....
The court denied bail due to substantial evidence indicating the petitioner's involvement in serious economic offences, emphasizing the gravity of the allegations and the need for accountability.
(1) Economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting economy of country as a whole and ....
The court emphasized that for bail under PMLA, satisfaction of twin conditions is mandatory, confirming the need for reasonable grounds against guilt and potential for re-offense. Balancing the sever....
The court granted bail under the PMLA, emphasizing the lack of sufficient evidence linking the applicant to money laundering, and highlighting the necessity for a predicate offence to substantiate ch....
Anticipatory bail may be granted under PMLA, considering the health challenges of the accused and lack of direct proceeds of crime linked to them.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA must be satisfied before granting bail in a money laundering case, and the accused's involvement ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
