SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 579

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD 
J. SREENIVAS RAO, J.
Boodati Laxminarayana - Appellant 
Vs.
The Directorate of Enforcement - Respondent 
Criminal Petition No. 2530 of 2025 
Decided On : 16-04-2025


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : PAIDA PRATIK REDDY
For the Respondent: D NARENDER NAIK SC FOR CENTRAL GOVT

Accused in money laundering must meet stringent bail conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA, reflecting the severity of the offense and impact on ongoing investigations.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 480 and 483 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 406, 420 and 120-B - Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 - Sections 3 and 5 - Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2022 - Sections 3 and 4 - Bail application dismissed in a case involving alleged fraud exceeding Rs.800 Crores on depositors, with the petitioner accused of serious offenses, including money laundering. (Paras 4.2, 18-20)

(B) Statutory bail - Under Section 167 of Cr.P.C. - Right of the accused to be released if final investigation report is not filed within the stipulated time - Emphasis on the validity of detention beyond legal limits and personal liberty protection under Article 21. (Paras 10, 18)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, accused No.1, is the Managing Director of a company charged with defrauding home buyers of over Rs.800 Crores for non-delivery of promised apartments, facing multiple FIRs, with significant evidence indicating ongoing fraudulent activity even during judicial custody. (Paras 2, 5)

Findings of Court:
The court found the petitioner has not cooperated with the investigation and showed a likelihood of continuing such behavior if released on bail, emphasizing the need for ongoing investigations into the remaining proceeds of crime. (Paras 21-25)

Issues: Determination of whether the petitioner is eligible for bail considering ongoing investigations and existing accusations of severe financial misconduct. (Paras 4.8, 12)

Ratio Decidendi: The High Court underscored that bail cannot be granted under the PMLA without fulfilling mandatory conditions as stipulated in Section 45, particularly given the severity of charges and potential influence on ongoing investigations. (Paras 18-19)

Result: Criminal Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. criminal petition for bail filed. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments by defense regarding statutory bail. (Para 3 , 4)
3. prosecution's claims on fraud and ongoing investigation. (Para 5)
4. investigation timeline and statutory bail provisions discussed. (Para 6 , 8)
5. judicial emphasis on timely investigation and rights. (Para 10 , 12)
6. provisions of pmla regarding investigation and bail. (Para 14 , 20 , 22)
7. court denies bail and dismisses petition. (Para 25 , 26)

ORDER :

J. SREENIVAS RAO, J.

1. This Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ) by the petitioner seeking bail in ECIR/HYZO/42/2022 on the file of the Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad.

2. The instant case originates from Crime No.158 of 2022 registered on 01.08.2022 at the Central Crime Station Police Station, Hyderabad, against M/s. Sahiti Infratech Venture India Private Limited, its Managing Director i.e., the petitioner herein, and others, for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1960 (hereinafter referred to, as ‘IPC’). The said crime was instituted basing on a complaint lodged by Mr. M. Yashwanth Kumar, who purported to be a home buyer. Subsequent to the registration of crime, the provisions of Section 120-B of the IPC and Section 3 and 5 of the TELANGANA PROTECTION OF DEPOSITORS OF FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT , 1999 (hereinafter referred to, as ‘TPDFE Act’) were incorporated into the case. The petitioner made as accused No.1 in the aforementioned crime.

3. Heard Sri D.V Seetharam Murthy, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Pratheek Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri D. Narender Naik, learned Standing Counsel for Directorate of Enforcement appearing on behalf of the respondent.

4. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that basing on the complaint lodged by one M. Yashwanth Kumar, Crime No.158 of 2022 was registered by the Central Crime Station, Detective Department, Hyderabad, against M/s. Sahiti Infratec Ventures India Private Limited (for short, ‘the Company’), Managing Director of the Company i.e., petitioner herein and others, for the offences under Sections 4 06 and 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (hereinafter referred to, as ‘IPC’) and subsequently, Sections 120-B of the IPC and Sections 3 and 5 of the TPDFE Act were added. Thereafter, on 11.08.2022, under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2022 (hereinafter referred to, as ‘PMLA’), an Enforcement Case Information Report was registered, vide ECIR/HYZO/42/2022 for the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA against the Company, petitioner and others. On 12.08.2022, the Police, Central Crime Station, D.D., Hyderabad, conducted a search and seized all the documents pertaining to the details of the projects undertaken by the Company. Basing on the other similar complaints made in the various police stations, First Information Reports were filed against the Company, the petitioner and others. The respondent issued summons to the petitioner and his statements were recorded on 31.10.2022, 01.11.2022 and 02.11.2022. The petitioner was arrested by the Police of Central Crime Station, D.D., Hyderabad, in respect of Crime No.158 of 2022 on 01.12.2022 and he was in judicial custody till 31.01.2023. Thereafter, on 01.04.2023, the respondent conducted another search in the Company office as well as the residence of certain persons under Section 17 (1A) of the PMLA and seized the material and also collected the documents pertaining to the case from the Central Crime Station, D.D., Hyderabad. The respondent also seized the bank accounts belonging to the Company, the petitioner and also other directors of the Company. On 20.12.2023, the provisional attachment was issued under Section 5 of the PMLA attaching movable and immovable properties worth of Rs.161.50 Crores belongs to the Company, the petitioner and his family members. The petitioner was arrested on 29.09.2024 in connection

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top