IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
A.K. PATHAK, J.
Mrs. Shivani Rajiv Saxena – Petitioner
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement & Anr. – Respondents
BAIL APPLN. 1518 of 2017
Decided On : 15-09-2017
Money Laundering - Bail - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Section 439, Section 45 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439; Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Section 45 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and its applicability to the bail application, emphasizing the conditions for release on bail and the discretion of the court in special circumstances.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved allegations of money laundering in connection with a contract signed by the Ministry of Defence, where the petitioner and others were accused of laundering bribe money through various companies and foreign bank accounts.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner, despite being a woman and claiming sickness, was actively involved in the affairs of the companies and did not qualify for bail under the special provisions of Section 45(1)(ii) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's eligibility for bail under Section 45(1)(ii) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, considering her gender, health condition, and the gravity of the alleged offence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the discretion under the proviso of Section 45(1)(ii) should be applied depending upon the special circumstances attending to such categories of person and not as a matter of thumb rule that all such categories of persons shall necessarily be granted bail.
Final Decision: The bail application was dismissed, emphasizing the gravity of economic offences and the lack of special circumstances for the petitioner's release on bail as a woman or sick.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
1. By this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Code, for short) read with Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA, for short), petitioner has prayed for grant of bail to her in Enforcement Case ECIR/15/DLZO-1/2014.
2. Brief facts of the case are that Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), registered a case vide RC 217 2013 A0003 dated 12th March, 2013 under Sections 7, 8, 9, 12, 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the PMLA read with Section 120-B and 420 IPC, in respect of a contract signed by Ministry of defence with M/s Augusta Westland International Limited, for supply of 12 numbers of AW 101 VVIP helicopters. It was alleged that the contract was awarded to the said company after changing the specifications of the helicopters, in order to favour the said company after taking huge commission/bribe. Subsequently, on the basis of said case, present ECIR case was registered for the offence under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of the Act. During the investigation, it was revealed that total 70 million Euros was paid as ‘kick backs’ by the said company. Petitioner and co-accused Gautam Khaitan, Rajiv Saxena (husband of petitioner, based in Dubai) and others were instrumental in laundering the bribe money in India and abroad. They were the carriers of proceeds of crime. The money laundering was done through several consultancy contracts executed between the said company and other companies, namely, M/s Gordian Services Sarl, M/s Tunisia and M/s IDS Sarl, Tunisia etc. These companies further executed consultancy contracts with M/s Interstellar Technologies Ltd., Mauritius, M/s IDS Infotech Ltd., Chandigarh, M/s Aeromatrix Info Salutations Pvt. Ltd., India and others. M/s IDS, Tunisia received Euro 24.37 million from M/s Agusta Westland. M/s Interstellar Technologies Ltd., Mauritius had received 12.4 million Euros. These proceeds were then transferred to foreign locations including the companies owned by the petitioner and her husband, namely, M/s UHY Saxena, Dubai and M/s Matrix Holdings Limited, Dubai. Petitioner was partner/director in both the companies. Petitioner was arrested in Chennai on 16th July, 2017 and her custody remand was taken. During this period, her statement under Section 50 of the Act was recorded. She was confronted with the records but she gave evasive replies. She also avoided to furnish information regarding companies situated in Mauritius and Dubai with which she and her husband (co-accused) were associated. Petitioner did not cooperate in the investigation. Huge transactions were noticed in the HDFC Bank accounts of the petitioner in India. Petitioner did not disclose other banks accounts, which found reflected in her HDFC Bank account. Petitioner was also associated with M/s Matrix Group Limited, Dubai, M/s Matrix Holdings Limited, Dubai, M/s Cronimet Mercon Invest. Ltd., Dubai, M/s ReCom Properties Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Whitespring Estate Pvt. Ltd. as a director or otherwise.
3. As per the respondent, the proceeds of crime were routed to India by way of investments made by the petitioner, her husband and their companies, details whereof, as could be traced till now, are as under :-
| Investments in India by Rajiv Saxena, Shivani Saxena and/or their companies | ||
| M/s Matrix Group Limited | INR 18 crores from 2011 to 2012 | M/s DM South India Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. |
| M/s Matrix Group Limited | INR 12.5 Crores from 2012 to 2014 | M/s DM South India Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. |
| M/s Matrix Group Limited | INR 19 crores in 2010 | M/s DM South India Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. |
|
|
| (The money was sent back in 2013) |
| M/s Cronimet Mercon Invest Ltd. Dubai (Director: Shivani Saxena & Rajiv Saxena) | INR 22.55 crores in 2009 | M/s GMR Ferro Alloys & Industries Ltd. (now M/s) |
| (Company acqu | ||
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.