Point of Law : Economic offences - Grant of Bail - On medical ground - When there is no bar of twin conditions contained in original S. 45(1)(ii) of PMLA Act - On merits as well as on medical grounds petitioner entitled to release on bail.

ORDER :

RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J.

1. The present bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 R/w Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in ECIR No. DLZO-I/43/2021 dated 20.05.2021.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a CBI case was registered vide RC 221/2021/E/0009 on 17.05.2021 U/s 120B, 420 IPC and Sec. 13(1)(d) r/w Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as PC Act) against the present petitioner/accused and other accused persons.

3. The present petitioner/accused was a Senior Vice President of M/s Jyoti Trading Corporation, at the relevant time. The accused persons named in the CBI case entered into a criminal conspiracy during 2007 to 2014 and cheated and defrauded IFFCO and Indian Potash Limited. (IPL), the share holders of those entities and the Government of India by fraudulently importing fertilizers and other materials for fertilizer production at inflated prices and claimed higher subsidy from Government of India causing loss of several crores of rupees. They allegedly siphoned off the commission received from the suppliers through a complex web of fake commercial transactions through multiple companies owned by the accused persons, registered outside India in order to camouflage the fraudulent transactions.

4. It is claimed that IFFCO set up its 100% subsidiary namely M/s Kisan International Trading FZE in Dubai for importing fertilizers and other raw materials from foreign companies. Bills were raised by the suppliers in favour of M/s Kisan International Trading at inflated rates to cover up the bribe money to be paid to the accused persons and similar modus was adopted in respect of other manufacturers/suppliers. Money was paid through hawala operators and intermediaries. Group companies of co-accused Rajeev Saxena, who is an accused in Augusta Westland Case also, were used for receipt of commission from supplier of fertilizers and other products to IFFCO and IPL. During the commission of crime, sham consultancy agreements and fake invoices for consultancy services were prepared without providing any such services and thus commission was received by group companies of Rajeev Saxena without any genuine transaction and that money was actually illegal commission generated out of import of fertilizers and raw material.

5. It is claimed that the present petitioner/accused acted as intermediary along with other accused for channelizing the ill gotten money through different firms and companies. It is claimed that in this manner, Rs. 685 Crores approximately were received in the bank accounts of the group companies and individual account of Rajeev Saxena and other accused including the present petitioner/accused Amarendra Dhari Singh. It is claimed that the fertilizers were imported fraudulently at inflated rates and the money was diverted abroad also through complex transactions. It is also the case of ED that in order to provide relief to the farmers, Government of India has been providing subsidies on different types of fertilizers and in calculating subsidy, the cost price of imported fertilizer is important and as such, due to the crime of accused persons, a huge loss also occurred to the public exchequer. It is also claimed that the present petitioner/accused had companies namely Lake Village Assets Corp. and Summerpark Cor., which were used for transferring money to another company owned by co accused. Money lying in the account of the companies of the accused abroad were used for making real estate investments.

6. It is submitted by the Ld. Sr. counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was arrested on 02.06.2021 and was remanded to police custody for a period of 13 days. It is further submitted that FIR bearing No. RC221/2021/E0009 was registered by the CBI on the basis of the complaint of one Nishikant Dubey dated 01.04.2013 and as late as on 14.06.2016, the said complaint was forwarded by the