TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 88
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....complaints given by the respondent herein under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [hereinafter referred to as 'PMLA']. (3) The petitioner is the Managing Director of two Companies, by name Surana Industries Limited [SIL] and Surana Power Limited [SPL]. The two companies are accused in Spl.CC.No.09/2022 and 11/2022. The petitioner herein is also a promotee of M/s.Surana Corporation Limited which is an accused in Spl.CC.No.10/2022. In the above capacities, the petitioner has also been arrayed as accused in the three complaints filed against the three Companies. (4) The case of the respondent is that the petitioner, through the aforesaid Companies, has misappropriated the credit facilities extended to the Companies and siphoned them off for personal gains causing loss to the tune of Rs. 3986 Crores and odd and thus, was involved in the offence of Money Laundering. (5) Initially, three ECIRs were recorded against the Companies and its Directors and their investigation revealed that the Companies above named, through their Directors/Promotees, indulged in the manipulation of Books of Accounts, indulged in paper transactions to inflate the turnover of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....used and the orders passed extending the remand, are bereft of reasons and therefore, the petitioner's right under Article 21 of the Constitution has been violated. ➔ The twin conditions enshrined in Section 45 of PMLA are not applicable while considering the remand extension and therefore, the orders extending the remand, must be supported by reasons. ➔ In the present case, the arrest of the petitioner was not necessary and the arrest has been made in violation of the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Another reported in 2014 [8] SCC 273. ➔ The learned counsel relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.S.Puttaswami and Another Vs. Union of India reported in 2019 [1] SCC 1 in support of his submission that deprivation of liberty must be proportionate to its legitimate objectives. ➔ Reliance was placed upon a judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Court on its own Motion Vs CBI reported in ILR 2004 [1] Del 47, in support of his submission that arrest has to be resorted only if the triple tests are satisfied. The triple tests are, [1]....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... right for statutory bail as the investigation has not yet been completed. (16) Per contra, Mr.Ar.L.Sundaresan, learned Additional Solicitor General of India assisted by Mr.N.Ramesh, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent [Enforcement Directorate] relied upon the common counter affidavit filed in Crl.RC.Nos.890, 975 and 976/2023 to show the magnitude of the offence committed by the petitioner and that, the prosecution which has already found proceeds of crime, has to unearth further proceeds of crime as the petitioner has siphoned off the money in various ways and through various persons. The learned Additional Solicitor General further pointed out that the petitioner's right to get released on bail has been considered by the Trial Court and the petitioner has already moved an application before this Court and the same would be considered on merits. However, there is no requirement under Section 309 of Cr.P.C., to give reasons for extension of remand. Section 309 of Cr.P.C., provides for conducting proceedings on a day-to-day basis and stipulates that adjournment beyond the following day has to be necessary for reasons to be recorded. The learned Additi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urnment of the same beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded. Provided that when the inquiry or trial relates to an offence under Section 376, [Section 376-A, Section 376-AB, Section 376-B, Section 376-C, Section 376-D, Section 376-DA or section 376-DB of the Indian Penal Code 145 of 1860], the inquiry or trial shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of filing of the charge sheet. (2) If the Court, after taking cognizance of an offence, or commencement of trial, finds it necessary or advisable to postpone the commencement of, or adjourn, any inquiry or trial, it may, from time to time, for reasons to be recorded, postpone or adjourn the same on such terms as it thinks fit, for such time as it considers reasonable, and may by a warrant remand the accused if in custody: Provided that no Magistrate shall remand an accused person to custody under this section for a term exceeding fifteen days at a time: Provided further that when witnesses are in attendance, no adjournment or postponement shall be granted, without examining them, except for special reasons to be recorded in writing: Provided also that no adjournment shall be g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t to enable him to access voluminous documents to defend himself in the trial. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gautam Navlakha's case [cited supra], no doubt, held that in extraordinary cases, the house arrest also can be one form of judicial custody. On the facts, we find that the petitioner has not made out any extraordinary circumstances for this Court to extend the said benefit to the petitioner herein. However, we are inclined to direct the respondent to ensure that all the documents relied upon by the prosecution are furnished to the petitioner and the petitioner has access to the same even if he is in prison. (25) With the above observations, Crl.RC.Nos.890, 975 and 976/2023 stand dismissed. (26) As regards Crl.RC.Nos.1026, 1029 and 1030/2023, the short question which arises for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled to statutory bail on the ground that the respondent has not completed the investigation. (27) The respondent has stated in the complaints praying for permission to continue with the investigation and this Court had already extracted the relevant prayer in paragraph No.13 of this common order. However, the prayer made by the respondent does n....