Back
SUBHASH VIDYARTHI
Kirti Nath Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
Directorate Of Enforcement, Govt. Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri S. P. Mishra, the learned counsel for the applicant, the learned counsel for the respondent-Directorate of Enforcement (E.D.) and perused the records.
2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 2 of 2018, ECIR No. 07/VSI/2012, Filing No. 1602 of 2023, UPLKO010018442023, S.T. No. 278/2023, under Sections 3/4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
3. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that on 29.05.2010, the Regional Manager, Ballia Gramin Bank, Ballia had sent a complaint against one Chandra Prakash Singh, Branch Manager, Ballia, Gramin Bank and some unknown persons, stating that when Chandra Prakash Singh was posted as Branch Manager during the period December 2008 to December 2009, he had embezzled public money for his personal gain and had misappropriated an amount of Rs. 1.60 Crores (approximately) and had thereby caused financial loss to the bank. In furtherance of the aforesaid complaint, a First Information Report bearing number RC 0062010A0017 under Sections 120B, 409, 420 I.P.C. read with Sections 13 (2) and 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was filed on 11.06.20
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court may grant anticipatory bail based on the lack of reasonable apprehension of the applicant influencing witnesses or tampering with ev....
The court considered the personal circumstances of the applicant, including age and health condition, in granting interim anticipatory bail.
The court's decision was influenced by the applicant's age, health condition, and the absence of allegations of recovery of proceeds of crime, leading to the grant of interim anticipatory bail.
The discretionary nature of approaching the High Court or the Court of Session for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, the importance of personal liberty, and the presumption of innocence ....
The High Court has concurrent jurisdiction with the Court of Sessions to entertain an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the CrPC. The twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA are....
The provisions of S.45 of the PMLA do not apply to anticipatory bail proceedings, allowing for bail grants based on case-specific circumstances.
The gravity of economic offences, potential influence on witnesses and evidence, and the failure to satisfy the twin conditions for bail under Section 45 of the PMLA were central to the court's decis....
The mandatory conditions under Section 45 of PMLA for granting anticipatory bail were not satisfied, emphasizing economic offences' serious nature.
Grant of anticipatory bail to some extent interferes in the sphere of investigation of an offence and hence, the court must be circumspect while exercising such power for grant of anticipatory bail.
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
