TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (6) TMI 178
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....L Act"). 2. The first bail application of the applicant MCRC No. 8620 of 2020 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 23.12.2020 with liberty to file duly constituted application. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent, who has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant has been arrested on 09.11.2020 and placed under detention. There is no case against this applicant under Section 3 of the PML Act. The Adjudicating Authority constituted under Section 6 (1) of the PML Act, has exonerated the applicant by its report dated 14.05.2018, after considering the material in provisional attachment order and the original complaint, holding that the applicant is not involved in money laundering. The charge-sheet has been filed after completion of investigation. 4. It is further submitted that the offence under Sections 3 & 4 of the PML Act, was registered against this applicant as Crime No. ECIR/RPSZO/05/2013. The same matter has been presented before the Adjudicating Authority and the Adjudicating Authority has given its decision vide report dated 14.05.2018, giving clean chit to the applicant. The applicant was also exone....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tter of Directorate of Enforcement Vs. Ratul Puri, reported in 2020 SCC Online Del 97, judgment of High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Dr. Vinod Bhandari Vs. Asstt. Director, reported in 2018 SCC Online MP 1559, judgment of High Court of Patna dated 28.05.2020 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 41413 of 2019 (MOST. AHILYA DEVI @ AHILYA DEVI Vs. The State of Bihar & others) and judgment of High Court of Bombay dated 06.06.2018 in Bail Application No. 286 of 2018 (Sameer M. Bhujbal Vs. Assistant Director & another). 9. The applicant is ready to abide by all the conditions imposed upon him, in case he is granted bail and further the applicant has not misused his liberty since registration of case in the year 2013 until he was arrested on 09.11.2020. Hence, it is prayed that this applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. 10. Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submissions made in that respect. It is submitted that the offence registered against the applicant, is of serious nature, which involves money laundering of the proceeds of crime, which is defined under Section 2(u) of the PML Act. The applicant, while on liberty, has made attempt to influence the investigation. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the proceeding against the accused under the provision of the PML Act. Further reliance has been placed on the judgment of Supreme Court in Directorate of Enforcement New Delhi Vs. Upendra Rai, in SLP (Cri) No. 5151/2020, in which, the Supreme Court has granted stay on the operation of the impugned order passed by the High Court of Delhi granting bail in the case of Upendra Rai dated 09.07.2019, Judgment of High Court of Patna dated 18.06.2020 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 73325 of 2019 (Vidyut Kumar Sarkar @ Ashok Das Vs. The State of Bihar & others), in which, prayer for grant of bail made by the accused, was denied by the High Court. 13. It is submitted that in case of State of Gujarat Vs. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal & another, reported in (1987) 2 SCC 364, it has been held by the Supreme Court that in case of economic offence, strict approach is recommended. In case of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2013) 7 SCC 439, prayer for grant of bail to the accused was refused on the ground of pendency of investigation and the magnitude of the crime committed. In case of Rohit Tandon V....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lse, baseless and imaginary, therefore, the applicant has entitlement for grant of bail. 16. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the records. 17. Crime No. 06/2010 was registered against the applicant by the ACB and on that basis, FIR No. 05/2013 was registered by the respondent. The brief facts of the case is this, that the applicant in the capacity of IAS officer, has made unlawful gain and then, with the help of his brother, who is Chartered Accountant namely Sunil Agrawal, 446 bank accounts were opened in name of villagers of village- Kharora, Motimpur Kala, Chingaria & Mandheipur. Huge amounts were deposited in these bank accounts and the same amounts were used for investment in the shares of M/s Prime Ispat Ltd., Raipur. The property of M/s Prime Ispat Ltd., is property of his brother and family members and on this basis, offence has been registered against this applicant under Section 3 & 4 of the PML Act. 18. Considered on the submissions. On the basis of the report of Adjudicating Authority dated 27.06.2018 in which, it has been held that the properties of M/s Prime Ispat Ltd., which has been attached by the PAO, is not involved in the money launderin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....judge as to whether allegation in the adjudication proceeding as well as proceeding for prosecution is identical and the exoneration of the person concerned in the adjudication proceeding is on merits. In case it is found on merit that there is no contravention of the provisions of the Act in the adjudication proceeding, the trial of the person concerned shall be in abuse of the process of the court." 21. It would not be appropriate to comment upon the facts of the present case and the case that was presented before Adjudicating Authority, but the same appear to be connected. As argued by both the sides, the question of applicability of the stringent conditions under Section 45 of the PML Act, has been decided by the Apex Court in the case of Nikesh Tarachand Shah (Supra). Paragraph 54 of this judgment is relevant, which is reproduced hereunder:- "54. Regard being had to the above, we declare Section 45 (1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, insofar as it imposes two further conditions for release on bail, to be unconstitutional as it violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. All the matters before us in which bail has been denied, because ....