Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
Dalip Jindal - Appellant
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement - Respondent
Bail Appln. 1549 of 2023
Decided On : 05-02-2024
Money Laundering - Bail Application - PMLA - Section 3, 4, 45 - The court dismissed the bail application of the accused in a money laundering case involving fraudulent transactions and siphoning of bank funds. The court held that the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA were not satisfied as the accused was involved in the process of acquisition, possession, and concealment of proceeds of crime, thereby committing an offence of money laundering under Section 3 of PMLA.
Fact of the Case:
The accused filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C read with Section 45 of PMLA. The accused was involved in fraudulent transactions and siphoning of bank funds, leading to a loss of Rs. 527.32 crore. The bail application was dismissed by the Trial Court, and the accused sought bail on the grounds that the arrest was unjust and arbitrary.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused was actively involved in the process of money laundering and did transactions of sale and purchase only on bogus entries from his concerns. The court held that the twin conditions of Section 45 of PMLA, which require reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, were not satisfied in this case.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused should be granted bail in a money laundering case involving fraudulent transactions and siphoning of bank funds.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA were not satisfied as the accused was involved in the process of acquisition, possession, and concealment of proceeds of crime, thereby committing an offence of money laundering under Section 3 of PMLA.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the bail application of the accused, stating that the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA were not satisfied, and the accused was involved in the offence of money laundering.
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
1. By way of present application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C') read with Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (`PMLA') has been filed by the applicant/petitioner, seeking grant of regular bail, in case titled `Directorate of Enforcement vs. M/s Deluxe Cold Storage and Food Processors Ltd. & Ors.' bearing Complaint Case No. 33/2022, pending pending before the court of learned Special Judge-04, CBI (PC Act), Rouse Avenue Court Complex, New Delhi (`Trial Court'), registered under Section 3 and 4 of PMLA.
2. As per case set up by the prosecution/Directorate of Enforcement, Bankey Behari Group of Companies, namely M/s Deluxe Cold Storage and Food Processors Ltd., M/s Sargodha Oil Mills Pvt. Ltd., M/s Mangal Pulses Pvt. Ltd., M/s Shree Bankey Behari Food Processors Pvt. Ltd., M/s Gagan Pulses Pvt. Ltd., M/s Shree NathJi Roller Flour Mills Ltd., and M/s Teluram Amar Chand & Co, were all engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of pulses, wheat etc. and these business entities had availed working capital funds from several banks. During the period from December 2016 to March 2017, all the aforementioned companies were declared as NPA due to default in repayment of loan amounts. Thereafter, the consortium of Banks had resorted to forensic audit and on the basis of Forensic Audit Reports, the Banks had lodged complaints with CBI, leading to registration of seven FIRs/RCs against seven companies/firms of Bankey Behari Group of Companies. On the strength of seven FIRs/RCs of CBI, seven ECIRs were recorded under PMLA, which are the subject matter of present complaint case. During investigation, from the analysis of relevant documents obtained from the banks, it was revealed that these entities had availed credit facilities to the tune of Rs. 480 crore, and the total amount defrauded was around Rs. 527.32 crore. As per prosecution, this case involves default in payment of Cash Credit Limit availed by Bankey Behari Group of Companies and the CC limit had been extended on hypothecation of inventory, trade receivables (sundry debtors) and other moveable assets. Since large transactions in terms of volume and value had taken place for purchase of goods and sales of manufactured/traded goods, the analysis of the major debtors of Bankey Behari Group of Companies was crucial since the debtors were emanating from fake sales which had taken place under broker codes B00000, B00001, B00003 and B00033. It was discovered during investigation Bankey Behari Group of Companies were making entries for bogus/paper sale to its customers under different broker codes, and the broker codes such as B00000, B000001, B00003 and B00033 were used for making false sale bills in the accounting software. Further during investigation, it was found that the Company was involved in paper sale and purchase with paper companies, created at the behest of Director Amarchand Gupta, his son Ramlal Gupta and his nephew Sanjay Kansal. The details of total amount of bogus/paper sale and purchase within the entities of Bankey Behari Group of Companies have been mentioned in the prosecution complaint. As revealed during investigation, the proceeds of crime which was Bank fund, was used to project it as personal capital of director infused in the form of share capital in Bankey Behari Group of Companies. Thus, it was found that the CC limit fund was siphoned in the form of share capital amounting to the tune of Rs. 149.02 crore, in the form of bank interest to the tune of Rs. 232.98 crore, and in the form of Income tax expenses to the tune of Rs. 38.66 crore, i.e. total amount of Rs. 420.66 crore. It was also found that 85-90% of the business of M/s Shree Bankey Behari Food Processors Pvt. Ltd., was on paper i.e. without actual movement of goods. Similarly, the debtors emanating out of these financial transactions were also false and were subsequently written off either through JVs
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 ....
The court emphasized that in economic offences under the PMLA, bail is not granted unless the accused proves they are not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception, especially in serious economic offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, where the gravity of charges necessitates stringent scrutiny.
(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 ....
It is not necessary to multiply the authorities on the sweep of Section 45 of the 2002 Act which, as aforementioned, is no more res integra.
The judgment emphasizes the need for substantial probable causes to believe the accused is not guilty, the requirement to prove allegations beyond reasonable doubt, and the presumption of innocence u....
The first proviso to Section 45(1) of the PMLA relaxes the strict twin-condition requirement for women, allowing courts to consider bail applications based on general judicial principles while consid....
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
