TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1116
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Act, 2002 (herein after referred to as PMLA, 2002) punishable u/s 4 of PMLA, 2002 pending before the Court of Sri Rajiv Ranjan, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-I-cum-Special Judge, PMLA, Ranchi. 3. A prosecution complaint under the PMLA, 2002 was instituted being ECIR Case No. 06/2023 against the present petitioner (Hemant Soren), Bhanu Pratap Prasad, Raj Kumar Pahan, Hilariyas Kachhap and Binod Singh and the background for sharing information u/s 66(2) of the PMLA, 2002 reveals that during investigation in another case being ECIR No. RNZO/18/2022 into the matter of fraudulent acquisition of land which was in possession of Ministry of Defence, Government of India, having area 4.45 acres at Morabadi, Ranchi it came to light that a group of private persons in connivance with government officials including the Ex-Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, Chhavi Ranjan and Bhanu Pratap Prasad (Revenue Sub-Inspector, Circle Office, Bargain, Ranchi) were part of a land grabbing syndicate and was involved in corrupt practices which included acquiring properties on the basis of false deeds, falsification of Government records, tampering with original revenue documents etc. to facilitate p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ahto and Kaila Mahto in the year 1939 executed at the office of the District Sub-Registrar, Ranchi. It was revealed during investigation that the said properties are entered in Register-II at Page No. 53 of Volume-I of Gari Mouza. The land belongs to the Mahtos which cannot be sold or transferred to the persons belonging to the General Category. However, Bhanu Pratap Prasad in connivance with his accomplices entered the property measuring 4.83 acres in the name of Samrendra Chandra Ghoshal at Page no. 139 of Register-II, Volume-I. This page was earlier opened in the name of a raiyat, namely, Jitya Bhokta, Son of Tetar Bhokta. The name of Jitya Bhokta as well as Tetar Bhokta were encircled in red ink and the name of one Samrendra Chandra Ghoshal and Jitendra Chandra Ghoshal were written in place of Jitya Bhokta and Tetar Bhokta respectively thereby making this property as a general property which became saleable. On being confronted with the said facts Bhanu Pratap Prasad had admitted about his involvement in his statement recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002. The Circle Officer, Bargain was requested to provide a fresh certified copy of the concerned page but he, vide letter dated 19.03.2024....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Minister of Jharkhand which was noted by all persons present during the survey proceedings by putting their signatures on the paper drawn for that purpose. In the second survey conducted on 10.02.2024, the land measuring 8.86 acres was confirmed by the officials of the Circle Office present there that the said land is situated in the locality of Lalu Khatal. An image of a plan of a Banquet Hall was retrieved from the mobile phone of Binod Singh, a close accomplice of Hemant Soren, in which, the locality of the proposed construction of a Banquet Hall was mentioned as "Lalu Khatal, Bariatu Road, Ranchi". It was also checked during the survey that no other big parcel of land was vacant in the vicinity where the proposed Banquet Hall could be constructed. Some people were seen living in a settlement inside the boundary wall who identified themselves as family members of Santosh Munda but they could not identify accused Raj Kumar Pahan who claimed possession and occupation over the said land occupied by Hemant Soren. They had stated that they have been living in the said land for several years but they have never come across anyone called Raj Kumar Pahan. During survey, an "Indotech" m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....u) of PMLA, 2002, it has been stressed upon that the said provision is with respect to a criminal activity relating to a schedule offence but in the present case there is no schedule offence and, therefore, no case of money laundering. Similar is the situation and the conclusion with respect to Section 3 of PMLA, 2002 as the same is also connected with the "proceeds of crime'. Even if it is assumed that the land has been in the possession of the petitioner the same would not conclusively prove that it is on account of "proceeds of crime". There is no document which would be indicative of the fact that the property measuring 8.86 acres has been transferred in the name of the petitioner or any of his family members and there is no material, either tangible or intangible, to draw an inference regarding acquisition, possession or ownership of the petitioner over the said property. None of the documents found in the possession of Bhanu Pratap Prasad, Circle Inspector would be suggestive in any way about the involvement of the petitioner. If the petitioner had resorted to forcible dispossession as alleged the sufferer(s) could have easily preferred a complaint before the Court even i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ely be resisted in law only by obtaining the decision of the court. Prof. Wade sums up these principles: [ Ibid.] "The truth of the matter is that the court will invalidate an order only if the right remedy is sought by the right person in the right proceedings and circumstances. The order may be hypothetically a nullity, but the court may refuse to quash it because of the plaintiff's lack of standing, because he does not deserve a discretionary remedy, because he has waived his rights, or for some other legal reason. In any such case the 'void' order remains effective and is, in reality, valid. It follows that an order may be void for one purpose and valid for another; and that it may be void against one person but valid against another." 10. It will be clear from these principles, the party aggrieved by the invalidity of the order has to approach the court for relief of declaration that the order against him is inoperative and not binding upon him. He must approach the court within the prescribed period of limitation. If the statutory time limit expires the court cannot give the declaration sought for." 5. The fact that Raj Kumar Pahan is the owne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gnificance when the names of the owners of the land have already been entered into Register-II. 8. It has been submitted that in absence of any presumption of guilt for the predicate offence the Court must consider all reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner is not guilty under the PMLA, 2002 and, in such context; reference has been made to the case of "Thomas Daniel versus Enforcement Directorate" reported in 2023 SCC Online Ker.8214. It has been submitted by Mr. Sibal while referring to the case of "Sanjay Pandey versus Directorate of Enforcement" reported in 2022 SCC online 4279 that none of the ingredients of a scheduled offence are prima facie attracted in the case of the petitioner hence the provisions of PMLA, 2002 will not be applicable. The scheduled offences in the instant case are u/s 420, 467 and 471 IPC. The petitioner is not an accused in the predicate offence being Sadar P.S. Case No. 272/2023. It has been submitted that the primary allegations in the scheduled offence are with respect to forging of documents and revenue records and that there is no allegation against the petitioner that he has forged any document and hence no offence u/s 468/471 IPC is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... complaint itself which according to him buttresses his contention regarding manipulation made in the files by the Enforcement Directorate. 11. The reliability and probative value of the statements recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 are to be tested during trial and cannot be used to deny bail to an accused and in support of such contention reliance has been placed in the case of "Chandra Prakash Khandelwal versus Directorate of Enforcement" reported in 2023 SCC Online Del 1094 and "Sanjay Jain versus Enforcement Directorate" reported in2024 SCC Online Del 1656. Assumptions seem to have, according to the learned Senior Counsel, assumed considerable importance in the prosecution complaint which can easily be deciphered from a perusal of the same. 12. With respect to recovery of a BMW Car and cash amounting to Rs. 36,00,000/- approximately from the premises of Shanti Niketan, New Delhi it has been submitted that the same neither has any bearing to the scheduled offence nor the same has any nexus or is a derivative from a scheduled offence. 13. The twin conditions laid down u/s 45 PMLA, 2002 in the facts and circumstances of the case are fulfilled by the petitioner. It has been submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... according to the learned Additional Solicitor General of India highlights the forgery committed in the government records. Elaborating his submissions, Mr. Raju has pointed out that during searches conducted on 13.04.2023 voluminous property documents and original registers were seized from the possession of Bhanu Pratap Prasad which were concealed and kept in his room. The properties were spread across different khatas and plots Nos. and the property acquired and possessed by the petitioner are entered in three volumes i.e. Volume-I, Volume-IV and Volume-V which were kept by Bhanu Pratap Prasad at his premises. The registers themselves are properties as per the definition in Section 2 (1)(v) of the PMLA, 2002 as they were involved in the commission of the scheduled offence and as such any forgery/ criminality/tampering relatable to the said registers was within the ambit of investigation under PMLA, 2002. Bhanu Pratap Prasad was an accomplice of the petitioner and had played a pivotal role in providing assistance to the petitioner in acquiring "proceeds of crime" i.e. 8.86 acres of land. During analysis of the mobile seized from Bhanu Pratap Prasad the image recovered contained t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s documents/official records confers a deep connection of the land with the petitioner. 15. Mr. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General of India has referred to an application submitted by Raj Kumar Pahan dated 16.08.2023 addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi wherein he has sought for cancellation of the registered deed and to restore possession to him and the Plot numbers mentioned in the said letter co-relates with the property measuring 8.86 acres located near Lalu Khatal, Shanti Nagar, Bargain which is in the possession of the petitioner and this application filed by Raj Kumar Pahan was an apparent effort made by him to shield the petitioner. The application preferred by Raj Kumar Pahan was done immediately after the Enforcement Directorate had issued summons to the petitioner. Some related documents were also seized from the cupboard of the room of the petitioner at Delhi. This according to Mr. Raju would amplify the role of the petitioner in using the State machinery for his own benefit and to frustrate the investigation. Additionally, the haste with which SAR Case No. 81/2023-24 was disposed of is a pointer to the role played by the petitioner and the State mach....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o. 68 of 2024 and with respect to the contention of Mr. Sibal in the said case as noted in para 19 that the Enforcement Directorate must show that there was a criminal conspiracy amongst the accused persons to commit one or other offences included in Part A, B, C of the Schedule reference has been made to the case of "Pavana Dibbur versus The Directorate of Enforcement" in Criminal Appeal No. 2779/2023. He has also referred to the following observation made in the said order, "In our opinion, any attempt to commit a schedule offence has to be made in Section 2 (1)(u) of the PMLA, 2002 as the expression 'any criminal activity relating to a schedule offence' shall encompass an attempt to commit a schedule offence". In continuation to the aforesaid the further finding which has been recorded is as quoted herein, "it may so happen, as has happened in this case, that the property was first grabbed and then the attempt was made to make it lawfully acquired through illegal acts which shall constitute the schedule offence or an attempt to commit the schedule offence". Reference has also been made to the finding that the abundance of materials collected by the Enforcement Directorat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e adjudicating authority has also accepted the said fact in its order dated 30.03.2024. 18. Mr. S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General of India has referred to various judgments in support of his numerous contentions advanced in opposition to the plea of bail of the petitioner. His contention of withdrawal of an application amounts to dismissal is anchored in the withdrawal of Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 6611/2024 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which was against the order dated 03.05.2024 passed in W.P.(Cr.) No. 68/2024 and gets support from the case of "State of Gujarat versus Ashish B. Gandhi" reported in 1992 SCC Online Guj 152 and "Rajubhai Pithabhai Vala versus State of Gujarat" reported in 2011 SCC Online Guj 2872. Submission has been advanced that the provisions of PMLA, 2002 has a wide amplitude and covers any direct or indirect attempt to indulge or knowingly assist or being knowingly party or being actively involved in any process or activity connected with the "proceeds of crime". Support to the said contention is in the form of the judgment rendered in the case of "Vijay Madanal Choudhary & Others versus Union of India" reported in 2022 SCC Onli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rya versus Ramesh Malik and Others" reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1465 and "Pavana Dibbur versus The Directorate of Enforcement" (supra). 24. In serious economic offences delay cannot be the only ground to grant bail and Section 436A Cr.P.C. is a sufficient safeguard. Reference in this connection has been made to the case of "Religare Finvest Ltd. versus State of Nct of Delhi & Anr." of the Delhi High Court in CRL MC 796/221, "State of Bihar and Another versus Amit Kumar Alias Bachcha Rai" reported in (2017) 13 SCC 751 and "Satyendra Kumar Jain versus Directorate of Enforcement" in SLP (Crl.) No. 6561/2023. 25. To spruce up the submission that reason to believe does not include considering merits or demerits, Mr. Raju has referred to "Gurucharan Singh versus State (Delhi Admn.)" reported in (1978) 1 SCC 118, "Nimmagadda Prasad versus Central Bureau of Investigation" reported in (2013) 7 SCC 466, "Ranjitsing Brarhmajeetsing Sharma versus State of Maharashtra & Another" reported in (2005) 5 SCC 294, "Puran versus Rambilas and Another" reported in (2001) 6 SCC 338, "Lokesh Singh versus State of Uttar Pradesh and Another" reported in (2008) 16 SCC 753, "Chaman Lal versus State o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vations made by the Division Bench that the provisions of PMLA, 2002 have to interpreted, expanded and expounded whenever the need arises keeping in mind the object and purpose behind the legislature are not in the teeth of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Others versus Union of India" (supra) rather is contrary to the observations made therein. 30. It has been contended that the findings recorded at para 3.5 of the prosecution complaint regarding 4.83 of land speaks about the mutilation of the pages of Register-II but the same is with respect to a different piece of land not co-related to the subject matter of the prosecution complaint. Para 3.1 of the prosecution complaint relates to acquisition and possession of 8.86 acres of land by the petitioner but such allegations are farfetched and not backed up by any substantive evidence. It has been submitted that the starting point of the accusation is an image recovered from the mobile of Bhanu Pratap Prasad which contains the details of a cluster of landed properties at Bargain and while reading out the table which forms part of para 3.9 it has been sought to be impressed upon t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r over Plot Nos. 989 and 996. The acquisition of property in a fraudulent and concealed manner as at para 9.21 is an inconclusive proposition which does not establish any connection with the petitioner. The visual representation at para 9.24 does not complete the chain to establish its relatedness with the petitioner. It has been submitted that cognizance on the supplementary prosecution complaint has been taken on 13.06.2024. Learned Senior Counsel has also referred to the case of "Ranjitsing Brarhmajeetsing Sharma versus State of Maharashtra & Another" reported in (2005) 5 SCC 294 and "Tarsem Lal versus Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office" reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 971. She has reiterated about the incarceration of the petitioner in custody which is since 31.01.2024. 32. I have heard the learned counsels for the respective sides and have also perused the affidavits filed including the prosecution complaint and the supplementary prosecution complaint. 33. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has stated about absence of any predicate offence and, therefore, the provisions of PMLA, 2002 will not be applicable. A predicate offence or a s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rime" include property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence;] (v) "property" means any property or assets of every description, whether corporeal or incorporeal, movable or immovable, tangible or intangible and includes deeds and instruments evidencing title to, or interest in, such property or assets, wherever located; [Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the term "property" includes property of any kind used in the commission of an offence under this Act or any of the scheduled offences; 35. In "Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Others versus Union of India" (supra), it has been held as follows: "253. Tersely put, it is only such property which is derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence can be regarded as proceeds of crime. The authorities under the 2002 Act cannot resort to action against any person for money- laundering on an assumption that the property recovered by them must be proceeds of crime ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e. In other words, the criminal activity may have been committed before the same had been notified as scheduled offence for the purpose of the 2002 Act, but if a person has indulged in or continues to indulge directly or indirectly in dealing with proceeds of crime, derived or obtained from such criminal activity even after it has been notified as scheduled offence, may be liable to be prosecuted for offence of money- laundering under the 2002 Act-for continuing to possess or conceal the proceeds of crime (fully or in part) or retaining possession thereof or uses it in trenches until fully exhausted. The offence of money-laundering is not dependent on or linked to the date on which the scheduled offence or if we may say so the predicate offence has been committed. The relevant date is the date on which the person indulges in the process or activity connected with such proceeds of crime. These ingredients are intrinsic in the original provision (section 3, as amended until 2013 and were in force till July 31, 2019); and the same has been merely explained and clarified by way of Explanation vide the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019. Thus understood, inclusion of clause (ii) in Explanation i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Bariatu Road (near Lalu Khatal). It is, therefore, the case of the Enforcement Directorate that the provisions of PMLA, 2002 would apply since the petitioner had derived or obtained property as a result of a scheduled offence and had indulged himself in an activity connected with the said property. The factual aspects of the case would negate the submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that there has been no schedule offence and, therefore, no case of money laundering is made out. In fact, the same issue was raised by the petitioner in W.P.(Cr.) No. 68 of 2024 but the Division Bench had invalidated the said submission in the following manner : "19. Mr. Kapil Sibal, the learned senior counsel submitted that the offence of conspiracy included in Part-A to the Schedule is not a standalone offence and to rope in the petitioner who is not an accused in Sadar PS Case No. 272 of 2023 with the aid of section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, the ED must show that there was a criminal conspiracy among the accused persons to commit one or the other offences included in Parts A, B and C of the Schedule. It is contended that the petitioner not being accused of comm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tirely different sphere and in view of the changed circumstances noted above would not be shackled by the observations made in W.P.(Cr.) No. 68 of 2024. 39. The involvement of the petitioner as per the prosecuting agency is primarily through the angle of conspiracy though according to the Enforcement Directorate Section 120B was struck off in the formal FIR at the behest of the Police in spite of conspiracy playing a predominant role in the predicate offence which led to institution of Sadar P.S. Case No. 272 of 2023. The prelude to the entire episode culminating in submission of prosecution complaint and supplementary prosecution complaint by the Enforcement Directorate is the recovery of huge quantity of incriminating documents showing forgery, manipulation and tampering of government records and mutilation of government revenue records. It is the consistent case of the Enforcement Directorate that the petitioner had manoeuvred the State Agency while holding the post of Chief Minister of Jharkhand in acquisition and possession of 8.86 acres of land at Shanti Nagar, Baragain, Bariatu, Ranchi and the Investigating Agency has attempted to connect the dots criminating the petition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Bhanu Pratap Prasad. The petitioner was also confronted with the WhatsApp chat between him and Binod Singh which contained sharing of information and conversation in respect of various properties but he had given a false statement regarding these chats. The construction of a Banquet Hall proposed at Lalu Khatal, Bargain prepared by Grid Consultants and shared by Binod Singh on WhatsApp with the petitioner have also been met with an elusive reply by the petitioner. Inference has been drawn by the Enforcement Directorate that the Banquet Hall was meant to be constructed on the 8.86 acres of land of the petitioner since there was no other land of such proportion in the vicinity of Lalu Khatal, Bariatu. In the statement of Baijnath Munda it is revealed that the land in question was originally owned by his ancestors and was forcibly acquired by the petitioner and Shibu Soren and the petitioner is in possession of the same since the year 2010. 42. The statement of Santosh Munda u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 divulges that he is the Caretaker of the land measuring 8.86 acres which has been acquired and possessed by the petitioner illegally and that he was earlier involved in the construction of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this Act: Provided that an Assistant Director or a Deputy Director shall not- (a) impound any records without recording his reasons for so doing; or (b) retain in his custody any such records for a period exceeding three months, without obtaining the previous approval of the [Joint Director]." 45. In "Vijay Madan Lal Choudhary versus Union of India" (supra), the validity of Section 50 PMLA, 2002 was under consideration and it has been held as follows: "449. In other words, there is stark distinction between the scheme of the NDPS Act dealt with by this court in Tofan Singh (supra) and that in the provisions of the 2002 Act under consideration. Thus, it must follow that the authorities under the 2002 Act are not police officers. Ex-consequenti, the statements recorded by the authorities under the 2002 Act, of persons involved in the commission of the offence of money- laundering or the witnesses for the purposes of inquiry/investigation, cannot be hit by the vice of article 20(3) of the Constitution or for that matter, article 21 being procedure established by law. In a given case, whether the protection given to the accused who is being prose....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the trial is yet to take place. The relevant part of the decision reads thus: "55. This Court is fully conscious of the fact that personal liberty is a sacrosanct right and pre-trial detention cannot be taken as a punitive measure. However, the court has to strike a balance between the interest of an individual and the interest of the society at large. This Court is also conscious of the fact that though the statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA are admissible in evidence but their evidentiary value has to be weighed at the time of trial... xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 57. Learned Senior Counsels have invited the attention of this Court towards the contradictions in the testimony of the witnesses. However, this Court is fully conscious of the fact that at the stage of bail, the court cannot appreciate the evidence meticulously. This Court at this stage, would restrain itself to make any comment further on this as the trial is yet to take place. The option before this Court is either to go into the meticulous examinations of the witnesses as being argued by the learned defence counsels or to take into account the statements recorded under Section 50 of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ir face value, but in case any such statement is patently self-contradictory or two separate statements of the same witness are inconsistent with each other on material aspects, then such contradictions and inconsistencies will be one of the factors that will enure to the benefit of the bail applicant whilst ascertaining the broad probabilities, though undoubtedly the probative value of the statement(s) of the witnesses and their credibility or reliability, will be analyzed by the trial court only at the stage of trial for arriving at a conclusive finding apropos the guilt of the applicant." 48. The statement u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 is admissible in evidence as such statement is deemed to be recorded in a judicial proceeding as envisaged in sub-Section 4 of Section 50 PMLA, 2002. This Court is aware of the fact that meticulously delving into such evidence is the domain of the learned trial court and, therefore, only a fleeting reference has been made of the statements recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 of the relevant persons. However, the same does not put an embargo upon the Court to disregard such statements in its totality particularly in a situation when the plea of bail of an accused is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), and accordingly the officers authorised under this Act are empowered to arrest an accused without warrant, subject to the fulfilment of conditions under section 19 and subject to the conditions enshrined under this section.]" 49. In Gurucharan Singh versus State (Delhi Admn.)" (supra) the "reasonable grounds" as appearing in Section 437 Cr.P.C. has been considered and it has been held as follows: "21. Section 437 CrPC is concerned only with the Court of Magistrate. It expressly excludes the High Court and the Court of Session. The language of Section 437(1) may be contrasted with Section 437(7) to which we have already made a reference. While under sub-section (1) of Section 437 CrPC the words are: "If there appear to be reasonable grounds for believing that he has been guilty", sub- section (7) says: "that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such an offence". This difference in language occurs on account of the stage at which the two sub-sections operate. During the initial investigation of a case in order to confine a perso....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....grant of bail can only satisfy itself as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt." 51. In the case of "Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma versus State of Maharashtra" (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court was considering the interpretation and application of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA) and the twin conditions for grant of bail as enumerated in Section 21 of the said Act seems to be almost pari materia with Section 45 PMLA, 2002 and the factors which must weigh in the mind of the Court while granting or denying bail has been dealt with in the following manner. "45. It is, furthermore, trite that for the purpose of considering an application for grant of bail, although detailed reasons are not necessary to be assigned, the order granting bail must demonstrate application of mind at least in serious cases as to why the applicant has been granted or denied the privilege of bail. 46. The duty of the court at t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aints made to the court as to the threats administered by the respondent or his supporters to witnesses in the case. In such circumstances, the Court was duty- bound to apply its mind to the allegations put forth by the investigating agency and ought to have given at least a prima facie finding in regard to these allegations because they go to the very root of the right of the accused to seek bail. The non- consideration of these vital facts as to the allegations of threat or inducement made to the witnesses by the respondent during the period he was on bail has vitiated the conclusions arrived at by the High Court while granting bail to the respondent. The other ground apart from the ground of incarceration which appealed to the High Court to grant bail was the fact that a large number of witnesses are yet to be examined and there is no likelihood of the trial coming to an end in the near future. As stated hereinabove, this ground on the facts of this case is also not sufficient either individually or coupled with the period of incarceration to release the respondent on bail because of the serious allegations of tampering with the witnesses made against the respondent." 52. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to the court to ascertain that once the accused is enlarged on bail, he would not commit any offence whatsoever? 37. Such findings are required to be recorded only for the purpose of arriving at an objective finding on the basis of materials on record only for grant of bail and for no other purpose. 38. We are furthermore of the opinion that the restrictions on the power of the court to grant bail should not be pushed too far. If the court, having regard to the materials brought on record, is satisfied that in all probability he may not be ultimately convicted, an order granting bail may be passed. The satisfaction of the court as regards his likelihood of not committing an offence while on bail must be construed to mean an offence under the Act and not any offence whatsoever be it a minor or major offence. If such an expansive meaning is given, even likelihood of commission of an offence under Section 279 of the Penal Code, 1860 may debar the court from releasing the accused on bail. A statute, it is trite, should not be interpreted in such a manner as would lead to absurdity. What would further be necessary on the part of the court is to see the culpability of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt while dealing with the application for grant of bail need not delve deep into the merits of the case and only a view of the court based on available material on record is required. The court will not weigh the evidence to find the guilt of the accused which is, of course, the work of Trial Court. The court is only required to place its view based on probability on the basis of reasonable material collected during investigation and the said view will not be taken into consideration by the Trial court in recording its finding of the guilt or acquittal during trial which is based on the evidence adduced during the trial. As explained by this court in Nimmagadda Prasad (supra), the words used in section 45 of the 2002 Act are "reasonable grounds for believing" which means the court has to see only if there is a genuine case against the accused and the prosecution is not required to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt." 56. In the case of "Y. Balaji versus Karthik Desari and Another" reported in 2023 SSC Online SC 645, it has been held as follows : "100. All the three FIRs allege that the accused herein had committed offences included in the Schedule by taking illeg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this regard may not be possible and the court is also conscious of the fact that at this stage, the evidence cannot meticulously be examined for this purpose. At the same time, for the purpose that evidence cannot be meticulously examined at this stage, the court cannot merely proceed on the basis of assumption. There has to be some substantial link between the money received and criminal activity relating to scheduled offence which can be attributed to the petitioner." 58. The plethora of judgments cited by the learned counsel for the respective sides gives prominence to the broad parameters which have to be satisfied in order to fulfill the twin conditions set out in Section 45 PMLA, 2002. 59. "Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma versus State of Maharashtra" (supra), reminds the duty of the Court not to weigh the evidence meticulously at the time of consideration of bail but to arrive at a finding on the basis of broad probabilities. The application of mind must be inherent in the order refusing or granting bail to the applicant more so in cases of serious nature. 60. The present case in the perspective of the legal pronouncements referred to above is manifest with circumst....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing from the statements of the persons recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002, the petitioner had acquired and possessed the land comprising of 8.86 acres in the year 2010 and the boundary wall was also constructed and it seems that only during the tenure of Bhanu Pratap Prasad, Revenue Sub Inspector, Circle Office, Bargain, Ranchi there was a necessity to verify the land in question which seems to be farfetched and with an intent to prosecute the petitioner. The Electric Meter installed in the said premises is in the name of Hilariyas Kachhap and here also the presence of the petitioner in any tangible or intangible form is absent. The Enforcement Directorate has questioned the order dated 29.01.2024 in S.A.R. Case No. 81/2023-24 as the same was instituted by Raj Kumar Pahan at the behest of the petitioner to create parallel evidence to exculpate the petitioner from the schedule offence which would gain strength from the haste with which the order was passed. The order dated 29.01.2024 in S.A.R. Case No. 81/2023-24 had been perused and it seems that all safeguards had been taken as legally required and thereafter the land was ordered to be restored in favour of Raj Kumar Pahan and Others. Thi....