Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.
Seema Garg - Petitioner
Versus
Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement - Respondent
CRM-M No. 3468 of 2022 (O&M)
Decided On : 21-02-2022
PMLA 2002 - Anticipatory Bail - Sections 3 and 4 of PMLA 2002 - [Money Laundering, Anticipatory Bail, PMLA 2002] - [Section 3, Section 4]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA 2002). The allegations involved VAT refund claims based on forged documents and subsequent money transfers.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's association with the investigation, the nature of the transactions, and the timing of the supplementary complaint did not warrant denial of anticipatory bail. The court also considered the provisions of Section 45 of PMLA 2002 and granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Issues: The issues involved the legality of filing a supplementary complaint, the impact of setting aside property attachment, and the applicability of Section 45 of PMLA 2002 to the grant of anticipatory bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the filing of a supplementary complaint was lawful, the setting aside of property attachment did not affect criminal proceedings, and Section 45 of PMLA 2002 applied to the grant of anticipatory bail, with a proviso for leniency towards women.
Final Decision: The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, emphasizing that the observations made were not an expression on the merits of the main case.
JUDGMENT :
Gurvinder Singh Gill, J.
1. The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in a complaint i.e. COMA/15/2017 dated 22.12.2017 (Annexure P-3) instituted by Enforcement Directorate, wherein a supplementary compaint (Annexure P-6) has been filed against the petitioner and others for offence under Section 3 punishable under section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to, in short, as “PMLA 2002”).
2. The allegations, in nutshell, are to the effect that M/s Jaldhara Exports, Ludhiana had shown export of ready-made garments to the tune of Rs.33.36 crores to Bangladesh during the financial year 2012-13 and on the said basis had claimed a VAT refund of approximately Rs.1.56 crores from Government but upon inquiry by custom authorities, it was found that all the bills produced by the firm regarding export of garments etc. were forged and fabricated. In other words, the VAT refund of approximately Rs.1.56 crores had been claimed solely on the basis of forged and fabricated documents and the said firm had never exported any garments worth Rs.33.36 crores, as claimed to have been exported. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, one FIR i.e. FIR No. 126 dated 26.7.2013 was instituted at Police Station Division No. 5, Civil Lines, Ludhiana for offences under Sections 177, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 IPC against Raman Kumar Garg, Proprietor of M/s Jaldhara Exports, Ludhiana and upon conclusion of investigation, a challan was filed against the said accused.
3. The accused, after receiving VAT refund of Rs. 1,56,76,160/- in the account of M/s Jaldhara Exports, Ludhiana, transferred the same through RTGS in the following accounts :-
(ii) A/C No. 10722466000006, DCB Bank of Umesh Kumar Garg.
(iii) A/C No. 10722466000005, DCB Bank of Seema Garg.
(iv) A/C No. 10722466000007, DCB Bank of Saiyarh Garg.
4. Based on the said facts, “Enforcement Case Information Report” (ECIR) bearing No. ECIR/JLZO/06/2013 was registered on 14.8.2013 under provisions of PMLA 2002, by Jalandhar Zonal Office of Directorate of Enforcement. The matter was investigated by the Enforcement Directorate and a complaint was filed against accused namely Raman Kumar Garg S/o Vinod Kumar Garg, M/s Jaldhara Exports, Vinod Kumar Garg and Umesh Kumar Garg @ Arjun in the year 2017. Subsequently, in March 2021, a supplementary complaint came to be filed against the petitioner - Seema Garg, as well.
5. For the sake of convenience, the relevant facts may be stated chronologically as follows :-
| 26.7.2013 | FIR registered against Raman Kumar Garg, Vinod Kumar Garg and Umesh Kumar Garg @ Arjun in respect of the allegations pertaining to a false claim made by Raman Kumar Garg, Proprietor of M/s Jaldhara Exports, Ludhiana of VAT refund to the tune of approximately Rs.1.56 crores which had been received by his firm and upon receipt of the same had been transferred to bank accounts of other accused, who were all related to him. |
| 14.8.2013 | The Enforcement Directorate registered ECIR against the aforesaid three accused as well as against three ladies namely Smt. Saiyrah Garg @ Deepika Jain, Smt. Seema Garg and Smt. Sangeeta Garg on the allegations of laundering of the proceeds of crime i.e. Rs.1.56 crore approximately, which Raman Kumar Garg had transferred from the account of the firm to the accounts of Smt. Sangeeta Garg, Umesh Kumar Garg @ Arjun, Smt. Seema Garg, Smt. Saiyrah @ Deepika Garg and Vinod Kumar Garg. |
| 16.7.2015 | Vinod Kumar Garg was arrested in the matter arising out of FIR. Bail granted to Vinod Kumar Garg in FIR case vide order dated 18.8.2015. |
| 23.10.2017 | Raman Kumar Garg was arrested in Complaint under Sections 3 and 4 of PMLA 2002 on 23.10.2017. He was ordered to be released on bail by this Court vide ord |
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
