TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 874
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....25735]. Mr. Kapil Sibal & Mr. Trideep Pais, Senior Advocates with Mr. Parminder Singh, Mr. Rishi Agarwala, Mr. Kanav Vir Singh & Mr. Ashish Hira, Mr. Sharan Niranjan, Advocates for the Petitioner in BAIL APPLN. 1173/2022 [9920525735]. Mr. Sanjeev Mahajan, Mr. Bharat Beriwal & Mr. Sarthak Chiller, Advocates for the Petitioner in BAIL APPLN. 1278/2022 [9811156437]. Mr. Anand Nandan & Mr. D.S. Mishra, Advocates for Petitioner in BAIL APPLN. 1203/2022. Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, Special Public Prosecutor for CBI with DSP Anshuman Saha, (IO) in all the petitions. J U D G M E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN 1. These six applications have been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ["CrPC"], for grant of bail in connection with FIR No. RCBD1/2014/E/0004/CBI/BS & FC, registered on 19.02.2014, in Police Station Central Bureau of Investigation ["CBI"], under Sections 120B/409/411/420/467/468/ 471/474 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ["IPC"] and Sections 4/5 read with Section 6 of the Prize Chit and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 ["PCMCS Act"]. As the six applications arise out of the same FIR, they were heard together and are bei....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed a principal amount of approximately Rs.45,184 crores. As far as PGF is concerned, the allegation is of investments to the tune of approximately Rs.332 crores. h. The present applicants were not named as accused in the original charge sheet, although some of them were referred to therein:- * Mr. Praveen Kumar Agarwal [inter alia in paragraphs 171, 172, 173, 206, 207, 208 and 212]. * Mr. Subhash Agarwal and Mr. Rajesh Agarwal are the Chairman and Managing Director of ARSS Infrastructure Projects Limited ["ARSS"] respectively, which is mentioned inter alia in paragraph 174. * Mr. Mohan Lal Sehjpal was a director of Pearls Infrastructure Projects Limited ["PIPL"]. PIPL and Mr. Mohan Lal Sehjpal find mention inter alia in paragraphs 181 to 190, 194 and 196 to 203. i. As far as the present applicants are concerned, they have been named as accused only in a supplementary charge sheet filed on 31.12.2021. A list of 265 witnesses and 307 documents has been filed alongwith the supplementary charge sheet. j. The applicants were all arrested a few days prior to filing of the supplementary charge sheet, i.e. on 22.12.2021. Five other indi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e dishonestly received the funds from M/s. PACL Limited (erstwhile M/s PACL India Limited) on the pretext of land development/ earthwork, but no land development work was done and fake / bogus invoices showing execution of work were prepared to justify receipt of such funds. The Work Order cum Agreements executed for purported execution of work were also bogus. Shri Akash Agarwal: In furtherance of criminal conspiracy with the accused promoters/directors of Pearls Group, Shri Akash Agarwal dishonestly and fraudulently facilitated diversion/misappropriation of funds to the tune of Rs. 161.44 Crores through 05 companies controlled by him. He dishonestly received the funds from M/s. PACL Limited (erstwhile M/s. PACL India Limited) on the pretext of land development I earthwork, but no land development work was done and fake / bogus invoices showing execution of work were prepared to justify receipt of such funds. Shri Mannoj Kumar Jain: He was the main Promoter/Director of M/s. Jain Infra-projects Limited. In furtherance of criminal conspiracy with the accused promoters/directors of Pearls Group, Shri Mannoj Kumar Jain dishonestly and fraudulently facilitated diversi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....material respects. As BAIL APPLNs. 716/2022, 1172/2022 and 1173/2022 were part-heard before this Bench, the other three applications, i.e. BAIL APPLNs. 1203/2022, 1278/2022 and 1382/2022, were also placed before this Bench pursuant to the directions of the Roster Bench dated 18.05.2022 and orders passed by Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice. It may be mentioned that Mr. Bhardwaj was instructed by the Investigating Officer ["IO"], who was present in Court throughout the hearing. Submissions 6. I have heard Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Mr. Mohit Mathur, Mr. Dayan Krishnan and Mr. Trideep Pais, learned Senior Counsel for the applicants in BAIL APPLNs. 1173/2022, 1172/2022, 716/2022 and 1382/2022, and Mr. Sanjeev Mahajan and Mr. Anand Nandan, learned counsel for the applicants in BAIL APPLNs. 1278/2022 and 1203/2022 respectively, in support of the present applications. Mr. Bhardwaj also made detailed submissions. 7. The principal arguments urged on behalf of the applicants were as follows[1]:- a. The case against the applicants does not concern the main charge of running a CIS or fraudulently inducing investors to invest in the projects of PACL/PGF. In fact, the ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vered on the basis of information and documents provided by them. The other applicants were not served with such notices at all. e. Learned counsel submitted that, although permission was taken from the Special Court to undertake further investigation in the year 2016, no steps were taken and the applicants were arrested only on 22.12.2021. f. The allegations being based upon documentary evidence which is already in the possession of the CBI, learned counsel submitted that the question of tampering with the evidence does not arise. In the cases of Mr. Rajesh Agarwal and Mr. Subhash Agarwal, Mr. Nayar mentioned that ARSS is now undergoing insolvency proceedings and the documents of the company are in the possession of the resolution professional and not of the applicants. g. The applicants, despite the long period for which investigations into the affairs of PGF/PACL have been proceeding, have not made any attempt to flee from justice. h. In the cases of Mr. Mannoj Kumar Jain, Mr. Mohan Lal Sehjpal and Mr. Subhash Agarwal, it is urged that they were summoned to the CBI office by virtue of notices under Section 41A of the CrPC dated 28.11.2021 and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rrested on 22.12.2021. l. Mr. Sukhdev Singh, the Managing Director of PACL, has been granted bail by the order of the Sessions Court dated 24.10.2019. The Managing Director of the principal company having been enlarged on bail, learned counsel urged that the present applicants, whose roles are far less serious than the role attributed to Mr. Sukhdev Singh, ought to be released also. m. My attention was also drawn to an order of the Special Court dated 16.04.2022 whereby one Mr. Chander Bhushan Dhillon, a director of PGF, was granted bail. In this order, the Special Court has taken note of the number of witnesses cited, the fact that the accused has been in custody since 22.12.2021, his cooperation with the investigation and also accepted his submission that he is not at flight risk. Learned counsel submitted that the same considerations would apply a fortiori to the present applicants. 8. In support of these applications, learned counsel for the applicants cited the judgments of the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra vs. CBI (2012) 1 SCC 40, Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy vs. CBI (2013) 7 SCC 439, Nimmagadda Prasad vs. CBI (2013) 7 SCC 466, Dataram Singh vs. State of UP (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CC 46 and Serious Fraud Investigation Office vs. Nittin Johari (2019) 9 SCC 165. Analysis 11. Before coming to the facts relating to the present proceedings, it is appropriate to crystallize some of the general principles which emerge from the decisions cited at the Bar:- a. The purpose of grant of bail is neither punitive nor preventative, but aimed at securing the appearance of the person at trial. Deprivation of liberty prior to conviction is a great hardship and should only be resorted to if release on bail is likely to prejudice the trial.[3] b. Even in the case of economic offences, the seriousness of the charge cannot be the sole ground for denial of bail.[4] c. Although it was held in Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy (2013) 7 SCC 439 and Nimmagadda Prasad (2013) 7 SCC 466 that economic offences must be viewed differently, even for the purpose of bail, even in those cases, while denying bail at a stage prior to filing of charge sheet, the Court granted liberty to the accused to seek bail after the charge sheet had been filed.[5] d. It is made clear in P. Chidambaram that (2020) 13 SCC 791, even in case of grave economic offences, it is not a r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in a case like this is largely documentary and has been recovered by the CBI over the long course of this investigation. There is no allegation that the applicants tampered with the evidence or withheld documents during this period. The transactions relate to the period 2008-09 to 2014-15. As a considerable period of time has passed since then, the chances of the accused being able to manipulate the books of accounts, at this stage, are much diminished. It may also be noted in this connection that the documents and account related information have been collected by various agencies, including SEBI, and will be available from those agencies also. There is no material placed on record to support the contention urged on behalf of the CBI that the applicants are likely to tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. Following the judgments cited above, such a contention cannot be accepted without a strong foundational basis, particularly when almost eight years have passed since the FIR was registered and five and a half years have passed since the original charge sheet was filed, during which period, the applicants were at liberty. d. All the accused were served with vari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on with those cases or have been released on bail. h. The applicants all have roots in society and there is no material to suggest that they are flight risks. i. It is also not possible to avoid the conclusion that the trial will take a considerable length of time. The CBI has cited a total of 447 witnesses and filed a list of 769 documents with the two charge sheets. The original charge sheet, alongwith its annexures, alone runs into over 34,000 pages. 13. Although learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Bhardwaj had, in the course of arguments, laid considerable emphasis upon the grant of bail to Mr. Sukhdev Singh, the Managing Director of PACL, and the denial of bail to Mr. Subrata Bhattacharya, I have decided the present applications independently of those orders, as the said orders concern directors of PGF/PACL, whose roles are at considerable variance from the roles attributed to the present applicants by the CBI itself. Suffice it to state that while rejecting Mr. Subrata Bhattacharya's application for bail, the Supreme Court specifically noted that the matter involved an alleged criminal conspiracy in furtherance of which "the Directors of M/s PGF Li....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... at the said addresses and will give prior information to the Special Court and the IO in the event of any change of address. c. The applicants will not leave the country without the permission of the Special Court. Their passports, if any, will be surrendered to the Court. In the event the applicant's passport is already in custody of any Court in connection with any other proceedings, an affidavit to that effect will be filed before the Court. The IO will also verify the position and file a verification report before the Court. d. Each of the applicants will give their mobile numbers to the IO and ensure that the said mobile numbers are kept in working condition and are reachable at all times. e. Each of the applicants will attend the Special Court on each and every date of hearing, unless exempted by the Special Court under exceptional circumstances. f. Each of the applicants will report to the Officer-in-Charge of the police station having jurisdiction over their place of residence on the first and third Monday of every calendar month at 04:00 PM, and will be released within one hour, after completion of necessary formalities. g. The....