TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 1197
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which is briefly stated herein-under: 8.9.2018 : FIR No. 358/2018 dated 8.9.2018 was registered at Police Station Sadar Fatehabad, District Fatehabad, Haryana for offences under the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 against Radhey Shyam and Bansi Lal, Directors of M/s FMLC & others. 9.9.2018 : FIR No. 859/2018 dated 9.9.2018 was registered at Police Station, Hisar, Haryana under Sections 420, 406 and 506 IPC, against Radhey Shyam and Bansi Lal, Directors of M/s FMLC & others. 31.8.2019 : Pursuant to constitution of S.I.T., the matters were investigated by S.I.T. and charge-sheet no.2 dated 31.8.2019 was presented in FIR no. 859 and charge-sheet no. 4 dated 20.11.2019 in FIR no. 358 was presented. 9.10.2019 : During the course of investigation of the aforesaid cases, it had transpired that the accused involved in the said cases were also involved in some other FIRs lodged in the State of Telangana i.e. FIR No. 710/2018 dated 30.8.2018, Police Station Kukkatpally, Telangana, FIR No. 643/2018 dated 15.10.2018, Police Station Ramchandrapuram, Cyberbad, Telangana, FIR No. 541/2018 dated 4.9.2018 at Police Station Chandanaga....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ving been summoned vide order dated 20.5.2022 passed by Special Judge, Panchkula on the basis of statement of co-accused Pranjil Batra, is on a better footing than the main accused who were initially named in the complaint and who were never sent into custody. The learned counsel submits that since investigation qua the petitioner already stands concluded and it was pursuant to conclusion of the same that supplementary complaint came to be filed against him, there is no occasion for subjecting him to custody at this stage. 4. It has also been argued that once the Investigating Officer had chosen not to exercise powers conferred under Section 19 of the PMLA so as to arrest the accused, the issuance of non-bailable warrants at this stage by the trial Court was not justified. The petitioner also claims parity on the ground that 12 other co-accused have already been granted bail either immediately upon their appearance by the trial Court or have been granted regular bail by this Court. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel has submitted that in such like cases of 'white collar crime', it is always not possible to figure out the modus operandi in the first instan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that a supplementary complaint has been filed against him, is likely to flee from justice. A prayer has, thus, been made for dismissal of the petition. 8. This Court has considered the rival submissions. 9. It is certainly not in dispute that the petitioner was not arrayed as an accused when the initial complaint came to be instituted on 22.1.2021. It was much later when co-accused Pranjil Batra disclosed involvement of the petitioner that the petitioner was arrayed as an accused and a supplementary complaint came to be filed against him on 20.5.2022. 10. As per the evidence collected during investigation, including the information retrieved from co-accused Pranjil Batra's laptop, a major component of the amounts so collected by ponzi companies run by Radhe Shyam and Bansi Lal and also through their associates was transferred to various bogus entities/shell companies through bank transfers/RTGS/NEFT bank transactions, in the guise of business transactions or was withdrawn as cash. During investigation, it was revealed that the petitioner was instrumental in facilitating Pranjil Batra for purchasing/acquiring 10 dummy/paper/fictitious companies in cash consideration to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder this Act or any of the scheduled offences; 3. Offence of money-laundering.-Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use and projecting or claiming it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of 'money-laundering'. Explanation. - For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that, - (i) a person shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering if such person is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to indulge or knowingly assisted or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in one or more of the following processes or activities connected with proceeds of crime, namely: - (a) concealment; or (b) possession; or (c) acquisition; or (d) use; or (e) projecting as untainted property; or (f) claiming as untainted property, in any manner whatsoever; (ii) the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a perso....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2 crores only having been recovered or attached despite the colossal volume of scam somewhere to the tune of Rs.3,000 crores, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner could yield further invaluable information as regards involvement of any other accused or for recovery of the proceeds of crime. 15. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the instant petition being a case of anticipatory bail wherein the investigating officer had not even chosen to arrest the petitioner initially, the rigors of Section 45 of the PMLA would not get attracted to the present case. The learned counsel, in order to hammer forth his aforesaid statement, places reliance upon a judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 Satender Kumar Antil Versus Central Bureau of Investigation and Another and also a judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court rendered in Bail Appln. 559/2022 - Rana Kapoor Vs. Directorate of Enforcement. 16. This Court has considered the aforesaid contentions and has also gone through the judgments relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner. This Court is unable to accept the aforesaid contentions, p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lication of the 1973 Code in matters related to "bail". The word "anticipatory bail" has not been defined under the 1973 Code. In Sushila Aggarwal, it was held as under: "7.1. At the outset, it is required to be noted that as such the expression "anticipatory bail" has not been defined in the Code. As observed by this Court in Balchand Jain, "anticipatory bail" means "bail in anticipation of arrest". As held by this Court, the expression "anticipatory bail" is a misnomer inasmuch as it is not as if bail is presently granted by the court in anticipation of arrest. An application for "anticipatory bail" in anticipation of arrest could be moved by the accused at a stage before an FIR is filed or at a stage when FIR is registered but the charge sheet has not been filed and the investigation is in progress or at a stage after the investigation is concluded. Power to grant "anticipatory bail" under Section 438 of the CrPC vests only with the Court of Session or the High Court. Therefore, ultimately it is for the court concerned to consider the application for "anticipatory bail" and while granting the "anticipatory bail" it is ultimately for the court concerned to impose conditi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... but also discriminatory and arbitrary. Thus, it is totally misconceived that the rigors of Section 4 5 of the 2002 Act will not apply in the case of anticipatory bail." (emphasis supplied) 18. It is well known that considerations governing the Court's decision on an application seeking pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. are materially different from that seeking post-arrest bail. In a case where pre-arrest bail is sought by an accused the advantage of custodial interrogation for eliciting more and useful information and material is to be kept in view. Besides, the exercise of power to grant pre-arrest bail is somewhat extra-ordinary in character. Hon'ble Supreme Court, in P. Chidambaram vrs. Directorate of Enforcement, reported in (2019) 9 SCC 24, observed that the power of anticipatory bail should be sparingly exercised in economic offences and held thus: "77. After referring to Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre and other judgments and observing that anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances, in Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar, the Supreme Court held as under: (SCC p.386, para 19) "19. Parameters for grant of anticipa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has to be given sufficient freedom in the process of investigation. Though we do not endorse the approach of the learned Single Judge in extracting the note produced by the Enforcement Directorate, we do not find any ground warranting interference with the impugned order. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in our view, grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant will hamper the investigation and this is not a fit case for exercise of discretion to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant." (emphasis supplied) 19. The aforesaid judgments leaves no manner of doubt that twin conditions imposed by Section 45 of the PMLA are applicable with full force even while considering anticipatory bail. When stringent conditions have been imposed in a case where a person has already been subjected to custodial interrogation and is in custody, it furnishes all the more reasons to apply the said stringent twin conditions in case of grant of anticipatory bail. As such, the contentions raised on behalf of counsel for the petitioner in this regard cannot be accepted. 20. It may here be mentioned that the constitutional validity of provisions of Section 45 of the PMLA-2002, i....