IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Amit Gupta, Son of Late Ramesh Chand – Appellant
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement, represented by Assistant Director (PMLA), Ranchi Zonal Office – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
Prayer:
1. The instant application has been filed under Sections 4 83 and 484 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying for grant of bail in connection with ECIR Case No. 05 of 2025 arising out of ECIR No. ECIR/RZNO/18/2024 dated 23.09.2024 for the offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [hereinafter referred to as PML Act, 2002] punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, based on the Complaint Case Nos.678 of 2024, 1280 of 2024 and 1281 of 2024 before the learned Court of Economic Offences, Jamshedpur under section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Sections 20 of the IGST, read with Sections 3 4, 120A, 193, 195A, 201, 203, 204, 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , pending in the court of learned Special Judge CBI- cum- PML Act, Ranchi.
Factual Matrix of the Case
2. An ECIR bearing No. ECIR/RZNO/18/2024 was recorded on 23.09.2024 based on the Complaint Case Nos.678 of 2024, 1280 of 2024 and 1281 of 2024 before the learned Court of Economic Offences, Jamshedpur against the petitioner and other persons. Subsequently, the prosecuting agency, i.e.,
Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and Anr.
Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Rana Ayyub v. Directorate of Enforcement)
Abhishek Banerjee & Anr. v. Directorate of Enforcement
Collector of Customs, Madras & Ors. v. D. Bhoormall
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.