IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the discretion to grant bail to women accused under the first proviso to Section 45 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Pranav Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. K. N. Singh learned Additional Solicitor General has made submissions on behalf of the Union of India.

2. The matter was earlier heard on 1st September, 2023 as a tied up matter and adjourned to today for further consideration.

3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Special Trial No. (PMLA) 05 of 2021, arising out of ECIR No. PTZO/04/2018, dated 24.05.2018, registered for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the PMLA’).

4. Several First Information Reports (for brevity ‘FIR’) were lodged in connection with fraudulent transfers /misappropriation of huge sums of government money under a conspiracy between government officials and employees, Bank officials and employees, office bearers and members of Srijan Mahila Vikash Sahyog Samiti Limited (for brevity ‘SMVSSL’) and other accused persons, popularly known as “Srijan Scam”. The petitioner is made an accused in following such cases:

(i) Special Case No. 17 of 2013 for the offences under Sections 7, 8, 9, and 13 r/w Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act,

(ii) Special Case No. 1 of 2020, arising out of R. C. Case No. 5(A)/2018 lodged under Section 409, 467, 471 and 120(B) of the IPC and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,

(iii) Special Case No. 2 of 2019, arising out of R.C. Case No. 9(A)/2018 lodged u/S 409, 420, 468, 471 & 120(B) of the IPC and Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(c) and (D) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988,

(iv) Special Case No. 41 of 2013 arising out of E.O.U. P.S. Case No. 29 of 2013 lodged U/S 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act;

(v) Special Case No. 02 of 2021 arising out of R.C. No. 13(A)/2017 lodged U/S 120(B), 409, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC and U/S 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(D) of Prevention of Corruption Act.

5. The offences being investigated were found to be scheduled offences as per the provisions of PMLA and, accordingly, investigation was taken up by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the provisions of the PMLA for ascertaining the proceeds of crime and for filing complaints. The ECIR No. PTZO/04/2018, thus, came to be recorded against the SMVSSL and its office bearers, government officials and employees, bank officials and employees and others. Investigations revealed huge sums siphoned from the Government treasury and transferred to the Bank account of SMVSSL. Government officials were also found involved.

6. The petitioner, as per allegation, was the District Land Acquisition Officer, Banka (DLAO) and was found to have conspired with officials of the Bank of Baroda and Indian Bank and office bearers of the ‘SMVSSL’ along with other unknown persons in misappropriation of Government funds running into crores of Rupees (82.10 crores) into the accounts of ‘SMVSSL’. She is stated to be very close to Late Manorma Devi, who was the prime accused at the centre of the entire scam and was Secretary of ‘SMVSSL’ since its inception, till her death on 13.02.2017. The Cheating and fraudulent misappropriation of Government funds by late Manorma Devi was in collusion with several Government officials, bank officials and other individuals, which includes the instant petitioner also. The petitioner is alleged to have received pecuniary benefits to the tune of Rupees 20,00,000/-(Twenty Lakh) for booking of a flat in Emerald-I-402, Gardenia Glamour Phase-II at Gaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. The said flat was alleged to have been acquired out of the proceeds of crime and were attached by a provisional attachment order on 29/05/2020.

7. Thereafter, Original Complaint No. 1313 of 2020 was filed before the Adjudicating Authority on 26/06/2020 for confirmation of the provisional attachment order in compliance with the principles of natural justice, inherent under Section 8 (1) of the PMLA. The same was, subsequently, confirmed by the Adjudicat