Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Tara Chand, Son of Kalyan Sahay – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India – Respondents
B.A. No. 11095 of 2023
Decided on : 01-03-2024
[BAIL] - [Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002] - [Sections 3, 4, 45, 50, 2(1)(u), 2(1)(v), 2(1)(y)] - [The court discussed the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, particularly focusing on the definitions of 'proceeds of crime' and the conditions for bail under Section 45. The court emphasized that the offence of money laundering involves any activity connected with proceeds of crime, and the burden of proof lies on the accused to demonstrate that the proceeds are not derived from criminal activity. The court also highlighted the mandatory nature of the conditions for bail, requiring the court to be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and is not likely to commit further offences while on bail.]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Tara Chand, sought bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, after being arrested for allegedly laundering money connected to a bribery scheme involving public servant Veerendra Kumar Ram. The investigation revealed that Tara Chand opened bank accounts under a fictitious name and facilitated the transfer of illicit funds.
Finding of the Court:
The court found substantial evidence against Tara Chand, indicating his direct involvement in laundering proceeds of crime. The court noted that he had opened bank accounts using forged documents and was engaged in illegal financial activities under the direction of co-accused Neeraj Mittal.
Issues: Whether the petitioner could be granted bail under the stringent conditions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, particularly in light of the evidence suggesting his involvement in money laundering activities.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that under Section 45 of the PMLA, bail can only be granted if the court is satisfied that the accused is not guilty and is not likely to commit further offences. The court emphasized the serious nature of the allegations and the need for stringent measures against corruption and money laundering.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the bail application, concluding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a special case for bail given the gravity of the charges and the evidence against him.
JUDGMENT :
Prayer
1. The instant application has been filed under Section 439 read with Section 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for grant of bail in ECIR Case No.2 of 2023 (A) arising out of ECIR-RNZO/16/2020 dated 17.09.2020 registered for the offence under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 with Schedule Offence under Sections 120B of the Indian Penal Code and 7(b) of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-VIII-cum-Special Judge, PML Act, Ranchi.
Facts of the case
2. The prosecution case in brief is that the investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was initiated by recording the ECIR/RNSZO/16/2020 dated-17.09.2020 against the accused persons on the basis of information received from FIR No. 13/2019 dated-13.11.2019 registered by the ACB, Jamshedpur.
3. Subsequently the Final Report has been filed by the investigating agency bearing no. 01/2020 dated- 11.01.2020 under Section 120-B and 201 IPC and under Section 7 (b) of the P.C. Act, 1988 against the accused persons, namely, Alok Ranjan and Suresh Prasad Verma.
4. Further, in course of search proceeding conducted in relation to the instant case at different places under Section 17 PML Act to investigate the role of the accused persons and their close associates, it is found that part of the proceeds of crime acquired in the form of commission/bribe in lieu of allotment of tenders by the accused Veerendra Kumar Ram, a public servant. The said bribe money was getting routed by a Delhi based CA Mukesh Mittal to the bank accounts of family members of Veerendra Kumar Ram with the help of bank accounts of Mukesh Mittal's employees/relatives.
5. It is also ascertained that Veerendra Kumar Ram used to give cash to Mukesh Mittal who with the help of other entry providers used to take entries in the bank accounts of his employees and relatives and then such fund was transferred by Mukesh Mittal into the bank accounts of the co-accused Rajkumari (wife of Veerendra Kumar Ram) and Genda Ram (father of Veerendra Kumar Ram).
6. Further Investigation disclosed that Mukesh Mittal contacted Ram Parkash Bhatia who is engaged in the illegal business of providing entries in lieu of commission for taking the entries into the bank account of Genda Ram. Subsequently, Ram Parkash Bhatia provided those entries with the help of his associate Neeraj Mittal using the bank accounts of the present petitioner which were opened under a fictitious name.
7. Neeraj Mittal using the bank accounts of the petitioner which also includes accounts opened on the basis of forged documents, provided entries of Rs. 3.52 crores into the bank accounts of relatives/employees of Mukesh Mittal which subsequently reached into the bank accounts of Genda Ram.
8. Further, it was also seen that the bank accounts of Genda Ram received high-valued funds from the bank accounts of Rakesh Kumar Kedia, Manish, and Neha Shrestha (relatives/employees of Mukesh Mittal) which were used in purchasing immovable property in the name of Genda Ram (father of Veerendra Ram). It is further identified that all aforementioned three persons transferred the funds to Genda Ram's bank account after receiving funds from the bank accounts of three proprietorship firms (M/s Om Traders, M/s Shri Khatushyam Traders & M/s Anil Kumar Govind Ram) of one fictitious person namely Sachin Gupta. It was further ascertained that present petitioner Tara Chand who is an associate of Neeraj Mittal was actually impersonating himself as Sachin Gupta.
9. In connection with aforementioned case the present petitioner was arrested by the E.D. on 25.06.2023. Accordingly, the present petitioner preferred Misc. Cri. Application No. 2942 of 2023 for grant of bail but the same was rejected vide order dated 18.10.2023 passed by the court of, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVIII-cum-Special Judge, PML Act, Ranchi.
10. Hence the present
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 ruled that in economic offenses, particularly money laundering, anticipatory bail is rarely granted due to the grave nature of allegations and potential interference with investigations.
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 court emphasized that under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty, which was not established in thi....
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 court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 as there were no reasonable grounds for believing that she had committed an off....
(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 court emphasized that bail under the PMLA requires satisfaction of twin conditions regarding the accused's guilt and likelihood of committing further offences, which were not met in this case.
(1) Offence of money laundering is an independent offence regarding process or activity connected with proceeds of crime which had been derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity relating t....
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
