IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J.
Prem Prakash, S/o. Pramod Kumar Sinha - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India through the Directorate of Enforcement - Opp. Party
B.A. No. 9863 of 2023
Decided On : 22-03-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the initiation of an ecir under the pmla is grounded in allegations of fraudulent documentation and land acquisition. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 6) |
| 2. the significance of the pmla in addressing money laundering through comprehensive legislation is established. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 25) |
| 3. the court emphasized the necessity of proving the conditions laid out in the pmla for determining bail eligibility. (Para 54 , 64 , 75 , 78) |
| 4. the bail application was dismissed due to the failure to satisfy the pmla's stringent requirements. (Para 106 , 107) |
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
Prayer
1. The instant application has been filed under Sections 4 39 and 440 of Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, in connection with ECIR Case No.05 of 2023 in ECIR-RNZO/10/2023, registered for alleged offence under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, pending in the Court of Special Judge, P.M.L. Act, Ranchi.
Prosecution case/Facts
2. The brief facts of the case is that an ECIR bearing no. RNZO / 10 / 2023 was recorded on 07.03.2023 and investigation under the provisions of Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) was initiated on the basis of FIR being Sadar P.S. Case no. 399 of 2022 dated 08.09.2022 registered for offences under Sections 406 , 420, 467, 468, 447, 504, 506, 341, 323 & 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE since offences under Section 420 and 467 of IPC are Scheduled Offences under Part A of the Schedule of PMLA, 2002. Purportedly, another FIR number 137 of 2023 dated 10.05.2023 under Sections 120B, 465, 467, 468 & 471 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE was also registered at Hare Street PS, Kolkata on the basis of the report of the fact finding committee of the Registrar of Assurances, Kolkata which has also been made a part of the investigation as the FIR has been registered for three different forged deeds which were manufactured to acquire different landed properties including the property measuring 1 acre at Cheshire Home Road, Plot No 28, Khata No. 37, Mouza Gari, Ranchi, Jharkhand.
3. It has been stated that the FIR being Sadar P.S. Case No. 399 of 2022 was registered on the directions of the Ld. Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 3111 of 2021 passed vide order dated 28.06.2022. A complaint case was also filed by Umesh Kumar Gope against Rajesh Rai, Imtiaz Ahmad, Bharat Prasad, Lakhan Singh, Punit Bhargav and Bishnu Kumar Agarwal for fraudulently acquiring one acre of land situated at Cheshire Home Road, Plot No 28, Khata No. 37, Mouza Gari, Ranchi, Jharkhand.
4. The allegations in the first information report being Sadar PS Case no. 399 of 2022 are briefly as follows :
(ii) Puneet Bhargav further sold the said land to Bishnu Kumar Agarwal through two Sale Deeds for a total amount of Rs.1,80,00,000/-(Two Sale deeds dated 01.04.2021 for an amount Rs.1,02,60,000/- and Rs.77,40,000/-).
5. The investigation further revealed that though the consideration amount in the deed between Imtiaz Ahmed, Bharat Prasad and Puneet Bhargav is shown as Rs.1,78,55,800/-, only an amount of Rs.25,00,000 was paid from the account of Shiva Fabcons one proprietorship firm of Punit Bhargava into the account of Rajesh Rai on 12.02.2021. Investigation further reveals that out of the said 25 lakhs an amount of Rs.18,00,000/- was immediately transferred to the Bank account of Green Traders, a partnership firm under the control of Md. Saddam Hussain.
6. Further during the investigation, Surveys were conducted on 09.02.2023 and 15.02.2023 At the Circle Office, Bargain, Ranchi, and office of Registrar of assurances Kolkata respectively and original re
Siddhrajsinh Bhagubha Vaghela v. State of Gujarat
State of Gujarat v. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal
Rana Ayyub Vrs. Directorate of Enforcement Through its Assistant Director
Tarun Kumar vs. Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement
Ramesh Bhavan Rathod vs. Vishanbhai Hirabhai Makwana
The court emphasized that in money laundering cases, the burden is on the accused to prove absence of mens rea, and economic crimes warrant stricter scrutiny in bail considerations.
The court established that under the PMLA, an accused can be convicted for money laundering even if not formally accused in the predicate offense, emphasizing the independent and serious nature of ec....
The offence of money laundering under PMLA is independent of underlying scheduled offences; involvement in any process related to proceeds of crime suffices for liability under Section 3.
The offence of money laundering under the PMLA is independent, and involvement in proceeds of crime suffices for liability; stringent conditions for bail must be met.
The conditions for granting bail under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, are mandatory, requiring the court to be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and is not likely ....
(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 conditions for granting bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act are mandatory, requiring the court to be satisfied of the accused's non-guilt and lack of likelihood to commit further of....
The court established that under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the offence of money laundering is independent of the predicate offence, and the burden of proof lies on the accused to ....
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.