Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2017 (9) TMI 952

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s 7, 8, 9, 12, 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the PMLA read with Section 120-B and 420 IPC, in respect of a contract signed by Ministry of defence with M/s Augusta Westland International Limited, for supply of 12 numbers of AW 101 VVIP helicopters. It was alleged that the contract was awarded to the said company after changing the specifications of the helicopters, in order to favour the said company after taking huge commission/bribe. Subsequently, on the basis of said case, present ECIR case was registered for the offence under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of the Act. During the investigation, it was revealed that total 70 million Euros was paid as „kick backs‟ by the said company. Petitioner and co-accused Gautam Khaitan, Rajiv Saxena (husband of petitioner, based in Dubai) and others were instrumental in laundering the bribe money in India and abroad. They were the carriers of proceeds of crime. The money laundering was done through several consultancy contracts executed between the said company and other companies, namely, M/s Gordian Services Sarl, M/s Tunisia and M/s IDS Sarl, Tunisia etc. These companies further executed consultancy contracts with M....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ere was no physiotherapist available in jail. Since petitioner is a woman and sick, rigours of Section 45(1)(ii) of the PMLA will not be applicable, in view of the first proviso to the said Section. 5. Petitioner is in custody since 16th July, 2017. Though, petitioner is Director in M/s Matrix Holding Ltd. but has no role to play in decision making process. Her husband is a chartered accountant and manages his profession and the companies. Petitioner is shown as an employee with a mere designation of Employee Director in M/s UHY Saxena, a partnership concern. Petitioner is also entitled to bail on parity since main accused Gautam Khaitan and other accused, namely, Ritu Khaitan, R.K. Nanda and J.B. Subramaniam have already been released on bail by the learned Special Judge. Ritu Khaitan, R.K. Nanda and J.B. Subramaniam were not even arrested by the respondent. In the predicate offence, that is, FIR No. RC 217 2013 A 0003 main accused namely Air Chief Marshell (Rtd.) Shashinder Pal Tyagi, Gautam Khaitan and Sanjeev Tyagi have also been released on bail. 6. Per contra, learned ASG has contended that petitioner is actively involved in the offence of money laundering and cannot be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y flee to Dubai using porous borders of India. Petitioner's husband is still in Dubai and has not participated in the investigation despite notices being issued to him. By placing reliance on several documents collected during the investigation, learned ASG has contended that petitioner is not a house wife and, in fact, was actively associated with the affairs of the companies, as detailed in para 3 herein-above. She has done Masters in Finance. 8. Relevant it would be to refer and rely upon Section 45 of the PMLA at this stage, which reads as under :- "45. Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable. - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), no person accused of an offence punishable for a term of imprisonment of more than three years under Part A of the Schedule shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless - ] (i) The Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release; and (ii) Where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1)(ii).However, in my view, the discretion as envisaged in the proviso has to be applied depending upon the special circumstances attending to such categories of person and not as a matter of Thumb rule that all such categories of persons shall necessarily be granted bail. 10. Similar proviso finds mentioned in Section 437 (1) of the Code, which reads as under :- "(1) When any person accused of, or suspected of, the commission of any non- bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but- (i) such person shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life; (ii) such person shall not be so released if such offence is a cognizable offence and he had been previously convicted of an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for seven years or more, or he had been previously convicted on two or more occasions of a non- bailable and cognizable offence: Provided that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Atlanta Natural Resources PTE. Ltd., Cronimet Mining GmbH, Matrix Holdings Limited etc. In the order dated 23rd August, 2017, learned Special Judge has recorded, on the basis of medical reports regarding health condition of the petitioner, that physiotherapy was being provided to her. It has been further noted that upon enquires made from the petitioner she submitted that she was getting proper medications and physiotherapy. Order dated 4th September, 2017 also indicates that jail authorities have been directed to make necessary arrangements for physiotherapy of the petitioner. There is nothing on record to establish that petitioner is suffering from such serious ailments which necessitates her treatment in multi specialty hospital from specialist doctor. Petitioner can be and is being provided medical treatment in jail itself. Petitioner only requires physiotherapy which can easily be provided either in jail or in any other hospital affiliated to the jail or in the vicinity of the jail. In Chhagan Chandrakant Bhujbal (Supra), a prayer was made for releasing the petitioner on interim bail for three weeks by filing an application under Section 439 of the Code read with Section....