TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (3) TMI 1768
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ws; It appears that a complaint has been filed by the Assistant Director- II of Directorate of Enforcement under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 before the Special Judge Ranchi (under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act) against the Petitioner Vikash Sinha. It further appears that information was filed under the scheduled offences of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, i.e. under Sections 420, 423, 424, 409 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Sections 7, 10 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and now for the offence under the Money Laundering Act punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 against Sri Madhu Koda, Shri Kamlesh Singh, Shri Bhanu Pratap ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he capacity of public servants. One of the co-accused Binod Sinha is the own brother of this Petitioner Vikash Kumar Sinha. It is alleged that this Petitioner jointly with his brother Binod Sinha acquired the properties and assets; the details of which have been given in the complaint. .... The present case is a very sensitive case, in which high profile persons like Ex. Chief Minister of the State is one of the accused. The allegation is that he along with other accused persons in collusion and connivance with each other named in the report have acquired huge moveable and immoveable properties and assets not only in India but in abroad also. The investigation against other accused are still in progress and, therefore, in my view if the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts/confessions were recorded under coercion. The statements made before the Income tax authorities are relevant for the purpose of taking action under that Act. He relied on 1992 Cri L.J. 2781K .T.M.S. Mohammad v. Union of India. The concerned authorities have not taken any action against coaccused persons, against whom, there are similar allegations such as Mr. Bandhu Tirkey and Bhanu Pratap Sahi, who are sitting M.L.As. The rigorous of Section 45 of the Money Laundering Act is applicable to the offences under part A of the Schedule of the Act, whereas no part of the schedule is applicable to the Petitioner on the basis of the offences alleged and therefore the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure with regard to bail will apply to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alia that during the Chief Ministership of Shri Madhu Kora, he along with co-accused persons acquired huge illegal money (proceeds of crime) through corrupt and illegal means and committed offences, which are covered under schedule of Money Laundering Act, in connivance with his close associates, including Petitioner and others. The proceeds of crime so accumulated were invested not only in India but in several other countries so as to project the same as untainted property such as Dubai, Hongkong, Thailand, Singapur and Sweden. The modus operandi adopted by the accused persons has been explained in detail by Shri S.K. Naredi (Chartered Accountant), who is one of the important witnesses in this case- that some Chartered Accountant/Entry Op....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on media reports, as on investigation, such reports have been found correct to a great extent Thus the Enforcement Department had reasonable belief about commission of offence. Some of the accused persons have not been arrested as investigation against them is going on. Referring to Section 3 of the Money Laundering Act, he submitted that the Petitioner is directly involved in the process and actively connected with the proceeds of crime for projecting it as untainted property. Petitioner may hamper and tamper with the evidences of this case, in which high profile person including ex Chief Minister are involved. He also referred to the order dated 26.10.2010, passed in S.L.P (Crl) Nos. 6995-6999/2010 in the case of CBI, Hyderabad v. B. Ram....