The court upheld the necessity of trial for charges framed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, emphasizing that prima facie evidence supports the petitioner’s involvement in fraudulent activities, warranting further proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J.

1. Both these matters are being heard and taken up together and disposed of by this common order/judgment.

2. Both these Criminal Revision petitions have been filed under sections 438 & 442 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

3. Criminal Revision No. 648 of 2025 is directed against the order dated 17.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner- XVIII-cum-Special Judge, PML Act, Ranchi in Misc. Criminal Application No.102 of 2025, in connection with ECIR Case No. 03 of 2023 arising out of ECIR//05/PAT/2012 registered for the offence under Sections 3 read with Section 70 of PMLA, 2002 and punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (in short PMLA, 2002), whereby and whereunder, the aforesaid petition filed by the petitioner seeking discharge, has been rejected.

4. Criminal Revision No. 529 of 2025 is directed against the order dated 03.03.2025 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner- XVIII-cum-Special Judge, PML Act, Ranchi in connection with ECIR Case No. 03 of 2023, arising out of ECIR/05/PAT/2012 dated 13.03.2012, whereby and whereunder, the learned Special Court has framed the charge against the petitioner under Section 3 of the PMLA, 2002 punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA.

Factual Matrix

5. The brief facts of the cases as per the pleadings made in the instant petitions required to be enumerated herein, read as under:

(i) The case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that CBI, ACB, Ranchi registered a FIR bearing No. RC-19(A)/09-R dated 22.10.2009 pursuant to the order of Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court passed in W.P. (PIL) No. 803 of 2009 for violation of Section 120B read with 420, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against the Company M/s Kaushalya Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter "M/s KIDCL") and other entities. Pursuant thereto, an ECIR bearing No. ECIR/05/PAT/2012 dated 13.03.2012 was registered by the Directorate of Enforcement.

(ii) The C.B.I. submitted charge sheet dated 31.01.2011 against the petitioner and other persons/ entities with the following allegations, in brief: -

a. An agreement No. 1F2/2004-05 dated 19.07.2004 and supplementary agreement No. 1F2/2004-05 dated 19.10.2004 were executed between the then Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department ("RCD"), Daltonganj/ Garhwa with M/s KIDCL as the contractor company for strengthening of Parwa-Garhwa Road in 0- 30 Kms for a consideration of Rs.3,96,26,072/- and Rs.74,53,056/-respectively.

b. As per the agreement [Notice Inviting Tender dated 08.05.2004], it was specifically mentioned that the contractor would procure the packed Bitumen of Grade 60/70 from Government Oil Companies like Indian Oil, Bharat petroleum and Hindustan petroleum and submit the relevant documents like proof of quality/purchase/ receipt of bitumen to the RCD. As per the agreement, about 1257.122 MT of packed bitumen of Grade 60/70, was required to be used for the said work. It is the case of the prosecution that the payment was disbursed on the basis of 59 invoices, out of which 26 invoices showing utilization of 560.959 MT to the tune of Rs.1,08,95,583/- of bitumen are allegedly fake and forged.

c. It is alleged that these purportedly fake invoices showing procurement of bitumen from HPCL and IOCL were submitted by M/s KIDCL/ Authorized Representative (Nagwant Pandey) to t