TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 14
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ordinate Bench of this Court, to which one of us was a party, passed the following order on 16.08.2022. "The Petitioners have filed the above Criminal Original Petitions praying for Bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the first Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No. 10954 of 2022 was the Managing Director of the Company by name M/s.Disc Assets Lead India Limited (Company) called as DALIL, in short and the second Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.10954 of 2022 was the Joint Managing Director of the said Company. The Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.10955 of 2022 was the Founder Director and Managing Director of the said Company till the year 2009. The Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.10958 of 2022 was the employee of the said Company and had actively a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nected entities were the family members / close relatives of the Directors of the Company. 3. The Economic Offences Wing of Tamil Nadu Police registered a case in Crime No.6/2016, dated 02.06.2016, for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 120 B of Indian Penal Code read with Section 5 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, 1997. Thereafter, based on the FIR an Enforcement case Information Report in [ECIR/MDSZO/04/2018] was recorded on 09.07.2018 against the Company and its Directors for the offences committed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. 4. The Petitioners were originally arrested on 09.12.2020 for the offences under Section 3 r/w 4 of Prevention ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1625 and 1626 of 2022. The learned Principal Special Judge dismissed the Bail applications since the Petitioners did not make out a case for Bail and there was no change in circumstances for grant of Bail after the orders passed by this Court dismissing the Bail applications which was confirmed by the Honourable Supreme Court. 8. Mr.R.Jayaprakash, the learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the Petitioners are innocent and the properties of the Company and its Directors are now vested with the Advocate Commissioner appointed by the Court to take over the assets of the Company, to resolve the issues and settle the Depositors. The learned counsel further submitted that the Petitioners are in the custody for more than 150 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the documents collected would prima facie disclose that all the accused have committed acts of money laundering under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and punishable under Section 4 of the Said Act and the Petitioners, during police custody also, did not co-operate with them and despite the complaint has been filed, further investigation is also progress. Even before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.(Crl.) Nos.7563-7565 of 2021, the Respondent submitted that the Petitioners are not co-operating during the investigation. Even before this Court, the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the Respondent submitted that the Petitioners never co-operated for the investigation and therefore, the Petitioners should no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Petitioners have not satisfied the 'twin conditions' for grant of Bail in Paragraphs 18 and 19 extracted above. The Petitioners have not spelt out the change in circumstances since the earlier dismissal of Bail petitions by this Court. That apart, we find that the Honourable Apex Court in the SLPs, did not merely dismiss the Bail applications, but also directed the trial Court to conclude the trial with utmost expedition. Therefore, Judicial discipline demands that this Court refrains from considering the Bail petitions pending trial in view of the above said observations of the Honourable Apex Court. 13. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of this case, the earlier order of dismissal of this Court; that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... need not satisfy the twin conditions. 3 (i). The learned Special Public Prosecutor per contra submitted that the earlier bail applications filed before this Court were dismissed on the ground that the twin conditions have not been satisfied by the petitioners and that the petitioners have not challenged the said order. (ii) The learned Special Public Prosecutor further submitted that as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and others v. Union of India and Others, reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929, Section 45 of the amended Act has to operate retrospectively. (iii) The learned Special Public Prosecutor further submitted that the petitioners have to be in custody for a period of one half of ....