2021 (9) TMI 1283

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... with Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred as 'the PML Act') and the petitioners have been summoned by way of arrest warrants. It has been submitted that a strong prima facie case is made out in favour of the petitioners and the criminal revision petitions may be treated as part and parcel of the stay applications. It has further been submitted that if interim order is not granted, the petitioners will suffer irreparable loss, therefore, the stay applications have been filed with following prayer :- "It is, therefore, humbly prayed that Your Lordships may be pleased to stay order dated 12.07.2021 (Annexure-4) passed by learned Sessions Judge, PMLA 2002 / Special Judge CBI Cases No.3, Jaipur Metro-I in Criminal Complaint no. 3/2021 as also the arrest warrant issued against the petitioners. Any other interim order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners-applicants." According to the brief facts of the revision petitions, case of the petitioners is that a criminal complaint registered under Section 43, for contravention o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....warrant under the PML Act. The facts of the case relied upon by the respondent in the case of Dr. Ashok Singhvi v. Union of India (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6273/2020, decided on 06.07.2020) do not apply to the facts of this case. No arrest warrant could have been directly issued, as per the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal, (2007) 12 SCC 1. Hence, it is prayed in the stay applications that the impugned order and arrest warrant issued against the petitioners, may be stayed till disposal of the revision petitions. Following judgments have been relied upon in support of the contentions raised in favour of the petitioners :- (i) Siddharth v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. 2021 SCC Online SC 615 (ii) Aman Preet Singh v. CBI through Director Criminal Appeal No. 929/2021 - SC - on 02.09.2021 (iii) Satender Kumar Antil v. C.B.I. and Anr. Special leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.(s) 5191/2021 - SC - on 28.07.2021 (iv) Rameshwar Sharma v. Union of India & Ors. S.B. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 16141/2017 - RHC - 21.05.2021 (v) Gaurav Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. Writ Petition....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reau of Investigation (2004) 72 DRJ 629 (xxvi) Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashta (1977) 4 SCC 551 In reply, it has been submitted by learned counsel appearing for the respondent that a prima facie case is established against the petitioners. A bare perusal of the order dated 12.07.2021 would reveal that learned court below has passed a reasoned and speaking order after due application of mind and found a prima facie case against the petitioners. Even the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kanti Bhadra Shah v. State of W.B. (2000) 1 SCC 722, has held that there is no requirement for the court below to write detailed orders at the stage of taking cognizance or issuing process. The revisional jurisdiction of the court under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. is very limited. Further, it has been submitted that in this case the petitioners have approached this court directly without availing the statutory remedy available to them under Section 70(2) of Cr.P.C. Reliance placed upon the judgment of Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal (supra), is also misplaced as the said judgment has already been considered and distinguished by this court in Pooran Sing....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ie, proved that any legal ground exists for staying the impugned order or issuance of the arrest warrant in consequence of the cognizance order. Therefore, the stay application is liable to be dismissed. In support of their contentions, following judgments have been relied upon :- (i) Kanti Bhadra Shah and anr. v. State of W.B. (2000) 1 SCC 722 (ii) Himanshu @ Hemant Rajendra Bhatt v. State of Maharashtra 2015 (2) Mh. L.J. 84 (iii) Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander and anr. (2012) 9 SCC 460 (iv) A.K. Subbaiah and ors. v. State of Karnataka and ors. (1987) 4 SCC 557 (v) Pooran Singh and anr. v. State of Rajasthan S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.474/2010 - RHC - 25.05.2010 (vi) Shyam Sundar Singhvi v. Union of India S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.273/201 - RHC - 24.01.2020 (vii) Shyam Sunder Singhvi v. UOI Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 792/2020 - SC - 10.02.2020 (viii) Babulal Verma and anr. v. Enforcement Directorate, Mumbai and anr. Criminal Application (APL) No.201/2021 (Bombay High Court) - 16.03.2021 (ix) Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Ram Kishan Rohatgi & ors. (1983) 1 SCC 1 (x)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a warrant-case, he may issue a warrant, or, if he thinks fit, a summons, for causing the accused to be brought or to appear at a certain time before such Magistrate or (if he has no jurisdiction himself) some other Magistrate having jurisdiction." It has also been argued on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioners that the cognizance order is bad in law and, therefore, is liable to be quashed and operation of the impugned order may be stayed till disposal of the revision petitions and arrest warrants issued against the petitioners, may also be stayed. In this regard, reliance has been placed upon various judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as of this court. In Siddharth v. State of Uttar Pradesh (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under :- 14. In the present case when the appellant has joined the investigation, investigation has completed and he has been roped in after seven years of registration of the FIR we can think of no reason why at this stage he must be arrested before the chargesheet is taken on record. We may note that learned counsel for the appellant has already stated before us that on summons being issued the appellant will put the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....instance, when the court is fully satisfied that the accused is avoiding the court's proceeding intentionally, the process of issuance of the non-bailable warrant should be resorted to. Personal liberty is paramount, therefore, we caution courts at the first and second instance to refrain from issuing non-bailable warrants. 56. The power being discretionary must be exercised judiciously with extreme care and caution. The court should properly balance both personal liberty and societal interest before issuing warrants. There cannot be any straitjacket formula for issuance of warrants but as a general rule, unless an accused is charged with the commission of an offence of a heinous crime and it is feared that he is likely to tamper or destroy the evidence or is likely to evade the process of law, issuance of nonbailable warrants should be avoided." Learned counsel for the respondent has seriously opposed the prayer of the petitioners and submitted that cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for offence punishable under the provisions of the PML Act, which is a serious economic offence and having regard to the nature of allegations, the learned court below has n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Aahir v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, it has been held that the High Court would be fully justified in refusing to quash the proceedings when the same relates to commission of economic offences. Economic offences are to be dealt with a stricter approach. In this regard, reliance has been placed on following judgments :- (i) State of Gujarat v. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal (supra) (ii) Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy v. CBI (supra) Further, it has been submitted that the learned court below has rightly issued the non-bailable warrants as the provisions of Section 45 of the PML Act clearly mention that the offences are cognizable and non-bailable. The relevant portion of the provision reads as under :- "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 [under this Act] 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 ar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e impugned order by which cognizance has been taken against them. Looking to the various pronouncements of Hon'ble Supreme Court in which it has been held that severity of the offence for which a cognizance has been taken against the petitioners and other relevant factors, the trial court has discretion to issue non-bailable warrants. Keeping in mind that the cognizance has been taken for offences punishable under the PML Act against the petitioners, which is an economic offence and Hon'ble Apex Court has consistently held that such offences need to be treated on a different footing. Also keeping in mind the provisions of Section 45 of the PML Act, at this stage it cannot be held that the learned trial court has committed any legal error in passing the order of issuance of non-bailable warrants. Therefore, keeping in mind various provisions of the PML Act and principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court as discussed above, the petitioners have not been able to prima facie make out any case for staying the arrest warrants directed to be issued against them vide impugned order dated 12.07.2021. Consequently, the stay applications are liable to be dismissed. Accordingly,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....¦à¤¨ के संबंध में जो रिकॉर्ड तैयार किया गया है उसके अनुसार परिवाद में अभियुक्त कम्पनी के द्वारा परिशोधित स्प्रिंट की जो ● मात्रा बतायी गई है उसकी पुष्टि होती है। इस दस्तावेज को परिवाद के साथ आरयूडी - 26 के रूप में प्रस्तुत किया है। क....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....®à¤¤à¤¿ से अधिक परिशोधित स्प्रिंट का उत्पादन कर 8,38,35,449/- रूपये अपराध का आगम प्राप्त किया तथा कम्पनी द्वारा लिये गये ऋण का भुगतान करने और कम्पनी के द्वारा कच्चा माल खरीदने के लिये उसके भुगतान के काम में वह राशि ली गई। परिवादी पक्ष के द्वाà¤....