TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 186
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iled under Sections 44 and 45 of the Act (as amended from time to time) that petitioner appears accused in eight criminal cases, which are:- (i) Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 95 of 2007 registered under Sections 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and section 27 of the Arms Act, (ii) Ramkrishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 68 of 2012 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 385, 354, 323, 379, 307, 504, 506 of the IPC, (iii) Ramkrishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 10 of 2012 registered under Sections 341, 323, 379, 504, 506 read with 34 of the IPC (iv) Ramkrishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 24 of 2012 registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 379, 427, 504 read with 34 of the IPC, (v) Ramkrishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 39 of 2012 registered for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342 and 323 of the IPC, (vi) Ramkrishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 127 of 2012 registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 353, 427, 504 read with 34 of IPC and Sections 31, 62, 63 of the Food Security Act, 2006, (vii) Ramkrishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 64 of 2013 registered under Sections 448, 436 read with 34 of IPC and (viii) Ramkrishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 115 of 2011 regist....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd FIR No. 64 of 2013 (registered under Sections 384, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC) are made basis for present implication with allegation that the offences as alleged are scheduled in terms of the Act, proceeds of which was utilized to create movable and immovable properties worth of Rs. 4,04,29,415/- (Rupees Four Crores Four Lakhs Twentynine Thousand Four Hundred and Fifteen only). 5. Mr. Sharma further submitted that the statement of witnesses as recorded under section 50(3) of the Act is not supporting the allegation. It is submitted that the onus is on the prosecution to show the schedule offences, proceeds of the crime and a connecting link between these two but, in present case, no such link established prima facie as to incriminate petitioner and, as such, entire implication against the petitioner is based upon assumption and suspicion. It is also pointed out that petitioner is capable of proving his source of income out of details which is a part of Annexure-2 series of the present bail petition, where his capital account, Income tax return and sale purchase deed are well explained. 6. While travelling over his argument, Mr. Sharma, while explaining innocence of this....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has also been made upon the legal report as reported in the matter of P. Chidambram vs. Directorate of Enforcement as reported through 2020 (1) BLJ 200 (SC) with a submission that granting bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that accused must get an opportunity for securing fair trial being one of his fundamental right as guaranteed under the Constitution of India. Mr. Sharma further relied upon the report of Rahna Jalal vs. The State of Kerala as reported through 2021 (3) BLJ 35 (SC), where in para 12 a reference was made to earlier decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court as reported in the matter of Bal Chand Jain vs. State of Madhya Pradesh as reported through (1976) 4 SCC 572, where same stringent provision of law was available through Rule 184 of the Defence and Internal Security of India Rules, 1971 vide Clause (b), where it was held that the anticipatory bail can be granted and, as such, Section 45 of the Act cannot be taken with such hardships, to the extent, denying even regular bail of the petitioner. 8. Per contra, Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh, Assistant Solicitor General while opposing the prayer for bail submitted that petitioner has committed crimina....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Sri Murlidhar Pandey, petitioner and others by Sri Santosh Kumar Pathak for which, charge-sheet has been filed. It is further submitted that the peoples were fraudulently taken into confidence by the petitioner by way of financial or other help and also insisting them to purchase land in their name. Later on, the documents related to the purchased property was procured by way of false commitment, mutation etc. and subsequently, the petitioner sold those properties to others by creating false and fabricated documents of the property, without the knowledge of the actual owner of the land. 10. Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh, learned ASG further submitted that on scrutiny of the sale-purchase deed of the petitioner and his family members received from District Sub- Registrar, Patna Sadar, Patna, it was found that many immovable properties were purchased and sold amongst themselves by the petitioner and his brothers, namely, Mr. Dablu Kumar, Bhonu Prasad, Day Shankar Prasad, Jay Vir Kumar and Sangeeta Kumari in order to conceal the primary source of acquisition of properties. He submitted that the petitioner has already siphoned off many immovable properties acquired out of proceeds of cri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come, despite of ample opportunity given to him, he has failed to produce any documentary evidence in support of his claim of income as reflected in his ITRs. He further submitted that the petitioner shows exaggerated agricultural income in the ITRs in order to conceal and to cover up the proceeds of crime in the guise of agricultural income so that acquisition of properties could not projected as untainted. 12. Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh, Assistant Solicitor General has further submitted that the premium of LIC policies purchased by the petitioner was paid in cash however, no evidence regarding the source of cash utilized for payment of premium of the purchased policies was produced. This shows that the insurance policies were purchased so as to claim/project proceeds of crime as untainted. He further submitted that petitioner has purchased vehicles in his own name and repayment of vehicle loan was made in cash through his own bank account. He further submitted that cash was credited into their respective bank accounts then, repayment of vehicle loan was made and he had not produced any evidence regarding the source of cash deposits that were utilized for repayment of loan. 13. Mr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aking money from any third person and making false documents, they again sell the same land, however, they do not give ownership of the land to any of the purchaser and, thus, generating proceeds of crime. 15. Mr. Singh, argued that the petitioner and his family members used to enter into development agreement with various builders and later, they used to take money in cash against agreement. However, the petitioner and his family members did not give possession to the corresponding builders and used to hamper construction work so that they can keep the land with them. This fact has also been corroborated by Mr. Sunil Kumar (Director of Radha Rani Construction Pvt. Ltd) and Mr. Sitesh Raman (Director of Raman and Kumar Construction Pvt. Ltd.) in their statements recorded under Section 50 of the Act. Mr. Sunil Kumar in his statement stated that he has entered into a development agreement of total land 15.5 kattha among land owner (petitioner), his brothers and his father Baleshwar Prasad Singh. After making development agreement, the petitioner and his family members started disturbing the work of development/construction of project and they sold 4.5 kattha land out of total 15.5 k....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome other persons at costly rate. Mr. Singh has next submitted that petitioner and his brothers used to first get registered any piece of land in the name of some innocent people having no criminal antecedent and later on, they used to sell the same landed properties within a month or two to some other person on higher rate and in this way, they used to disguise the ownership of land. 17. Mr. Singh has argued that the statement of the petitioner was also recorded under Section 50(3) of the Act wherein he stated that one property was purchased by him from Suman Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti vide sale deed no. 16140 dated 21.05.2012 measuring 13.28125 decimal against Rs. 3,26,000/- was again registered by him in his name in four parts vide sale deed nos. 6702/2013, 1923/2013, 31707/2012 and 2057/2016 and this action was taken by him in order to prevent any dispute raised by the descendant of the owner of original property and he did not pay anything towards the execution of such sale deeds. He further submitted that during the course of investigation, it was found that the petitioner and his gang members used to forcefully acquire land of innocent people by having it registered in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal Procedure in case of conflict between them. Section 45 of PMLA imposes the following two conditions for grant of bail to any person accused of an offence punishable for a term of imprisonment of more than three years under Part A of the Schedule of PMLA: (i) That the prosecutor must be given an opportunity to oppose the application for bail; and (ii) That the court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused person is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. 30. The conditions specified under Section 45 of PMLA are mandatory and needs to be complied with, which is further strengthened by the provisions of Section 65 and also Section 71 of PMLA. Section 65 requires that the provisions of CrPC shall apply insofar as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act and Section 71 provides that the provisions of PMLA shall have overriding effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force. PMLA has an overriding effect and the provisions of CrPC would apply only if they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., or any other provision of this Act, no police officer shall investigate into an offence under this Act unless specifically authorised, by the Central Government by a general or special order, and, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed;] (2) The limitation on granting of bail specified in 3 [***] sub-section (1) is in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail". 21. While concluding argument, learned ASG by taking note of statement of petitioner, as recorded under Section 50(3) of the Act, submitted that the source of purchasing all land as submitted above is income from agriculture, dairy firm and house rent income, where no documentary evidence regarding source of fund utilized for purchase of said land appears to be supported by documentary evidence, drawing a presumption that all such property acquired through cash generated through proceeds of crime. It is pointed out that the value of purchased immovable properties during the period 2010-2013 is to the tune Rs. 1.24 crores, which is 23 times more than the income shown in ITR during the said period. 22. Lea....