TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1452
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2024 at EOW/ACB, Raipur under Sections for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 420,467,468,471 of IPC and Section 7 & 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act against Mr. Anil Tuteja (retired IAS) then Joint Secretary in CG State, Anwar Dhebar, Mr. Arunpati Tripathi (ITS) then Special Secretary, Government of Commerce and industry Department and MD CG State Marketing Corporation Ltd. Mr. Vikas Agarwal @ Subbu, Mr. Sanjay Diwan and Others for collecting commissions and supplying unaccounted liquor to government liquor shops resulting in an approximate loss of Rs. 2161 crores to the government. 3. The manufacturers of country liquor in Chhattisgarh namely CG Distilleries Ltd., M/s. Bhatia Wine Merchant Private ltd. And Welcome Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. Are licensed to supply country liquor in the State. It is alleged that Co-accused Anwar Dhebar took advantage of his political influence and family relations with Anil Tuteja and in association with Arunpathi Tripathi, the Managing Director of CSMCL lead to increase in the rate of liquor production and supply and in return gained illegal commissions amounting to lakhs of rupees from the distillery owners which is called Part -A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gation, statements of distillers, FL-10A licenses, manpower supplier agencies and others were recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA, 2002. Ont he basis of the above documents and records it has been established that a well planned systematic conspiracy was executed by the syndicate to earn illegal commission in the sale and licensing of liquor in the State of Chhattisgarh. 8. The excise policy in the State of Chhattisgarh was amended in the year 2017 The excise policy in the State of Chhattisgarh was amended in the year 2017 and CSMCL in February, 2017, was thus created with the responsibility to exclusively retail liquor in the State of Chhattisgarh through its stores. The CSMCL was established with the vision to provide genuine liquor, to stop sale of illegal Liquor, to provide liquor on MRP. It established its own stores to retail the liquor/beer/wine/country liquor after procuring liquor from manufacturers directly and IMFL from another State PSU CSBCL. 9. It has also been revealed that with the advent of new policy in the State, CSMCL was incorporated and it established its own stores to retain the liquor/beer/wine/country liquor after procuring country liquor directly f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of crime in relation to the ECIR 11 and the Prosecution Complaint filed therein. The said ECIR was registered merely 3 days after the quashing of the 1st ECIR on the same alleged liquor scam making the same allegations arising of the same transaction. 13. Based upon the Prosecution Complaint filed by the Income Tax Department bearing Ct. Case No. 1183/2022 under Sections 276(C)/277/278/278E of the IT Act read with Section 120-B/191/199/200/204 IPC the Ed registered an ECIR bearing No. ECIR/RPZO/112022. The ED considered Section 120-B IPC standalone as the underlying scheduled offence. 14. It is submitted that the ED had filed the first Prosecution Complaint in the said ECIR arraigning co-accused of the applicant as an accused therein. Pertinently, the Prosecution Complaint was nothing but an exact replica of the Prosecution Complaint filed in the ECIR 11, wherein the Applicant was made an accused and which was quashed by the Apex Court vide order dated 08.04.2024. On 08.08.2024, pursuant to the production warrant, the applicant was produced before this Court and was arrested by the Prosecuting Agency for the second time in relation to the same alleged liquor scam to which t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y for an indefinite period. He has placed his reliance in the matter of Satender Kumar Anitl Vs. CBI SLP 5191/2021; Krishnan Subramanian Vs. State NCT of Delhi 2022 SCC Online Del 1384. He submits that there has been no recovery of any unaccounted assets or incriminating material from the applicant or his family members. 18. It is submitted that as per the ED, investigation against 11 persons including the applicant is complete and three prosecution complaints against 11 accused persons spanning to nearly 20,000 pages with over 30 witnesses and 250 documents have been filed by the investigating agency and the investigation is going on. Despite the alleged huge scam, prosecution complaint has been filed against 11 persons. Even as per allegations made in the complaint filed by the ED role of other individuals have also been surfaced. The status of trial in the scheduled offence must be taken into account while considering the issue of delay in trial in the PMLA case because the PMLA proceedings are contingent on the proceedings in the scheduled offence. In the matter of Senthil Balaji Vs. Directorate of Enforcement Crl. App. No. 4011/2024, it has been held as under: "....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....denial of these rights, the trial court as well as the High Court ought to have given due weightage to this factor. XXX XXXX XXX 54. In the present case, in the ED matter as well as the CBI matter, 493 witnesses have been named. The case involves thousands of pages of documents and over a lakh pages of digitized documents. It is thus clear that there is not even the remotest possibility of the trial being concluded in the near future. In our view, keeping the appellant behind the bars for an unlimited period of time in the hope of speedy completion of trial would deprive his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. As observed time and again, the prolonged incarceration before being pronounced guilty of an offence should not be permitted to become punishment without trial." 21. Similarly, in the matter of Bibhav Kumar Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2024 SCC Online SC 2646, wherein the bail was granted inter alia on the ground that he has been in custody for 100 days. It further reads as under: "4. It is not a matter of dispute that the investigation is complete and the charge sheet has been filed. Keeping that stage in mind, we do not dee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....acy of the country that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment, but that the requirements as to bail are merely to secure the attendance of the prisoner at trial." 23. The Apex Court in the cases of prolonged incarceration and delay in trial, the Prosecution should not even oppose the bail on the ground of seriousness of offence. He has referred to the judgment of Gulam Nabi shaikh Vs. State of Maharastra, 2024 SCC OnLine SC1693, wherein it has been observed that : "19. If the State or any prosecuting agency including the court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime." 24. It is contended that the investigating agency in the scheduled offence has submitted that at least 3 to 4 more charge sheets are yet to be filed in the scheduled offence. There are nearly 70 accused persons in the Chhattisgarh FIR and the charge sheet has been filed o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pt in custody for around 62 days. This Court referred to Section 19 of the PML Act, for the in-built safeguards to be adhered to by the authorized officers to ensure fairness, objectivity and accountability. Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra), also held that Section 436A of the Code can apply to offences under the PML Act, as it effectuates the right to speedy trial, a facet of the right to life, except for a valid ground such as where the trial is delayed at the instance of the accused himself. In our opinion, Section 436A should not be construed as a mandate that an accused should not be granted bail under the PML Act till he has suffered incarceration for the specified period. This Court, in Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra and Others (2021) 2 SCC 427, held that while ensuring proper enforcement of criminal law on one hand, the court must be conscious that liberty across human eras is as tenacious as tenacious can be. 29. Detention or jail before being pronounced guilty of an offence should not become punishment without trial. If the trial gets protracted despite assurances of the prosecution, and it is clear that case will not be decided....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, should be read into Section 439 Cr.P.C. and Section 45 of the PMLA. The Court held that the constitutional mandate is the higher law, and it is the basic right of the person charged of an offence and not convicted that he be ensured and given a speedy trial. It further observed that when the trial is not proceeding for reasons not attributable to the accused, the court, unless there are good reasons, would be guided to exercise the power to grant bail. The Court specifically observed that this would be true where the trial would take years. It could thus clearly be seen that this Court, in the first round of litigation between the parties, has specifically observed that in case of delay coupled with incarceration for a long period and depending on the nature of the allegations, the right to bail will have to be read into Section 45 of PMLA. XXXX XXXX XXXX 39. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ramkripal Meena v. Directorate of Enforcement5 was considering an application of the petitioner therein who was SLP(Crl.) No. 3205 of 2024 dated 30.07.2024 to receive a bribe of rupees five crore and from whom, an amount of Rs. 46,00,000/- was already recove....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f bail is neither punitive nor preventative. The primary purpose of bail in a criminal case is to ensure that the accused will submit to the jurisdiction of the Court and be in attendance whenever his presence is required. Deprivation of liberty must be considered punishment unless it can be required to ensure that an accused person will stand trial when called upon. Punishment can only begin after conviction and necessity is the operative test. in the matter of Manish Sisodia 3 (2024) SCC OnLine SC 920, it has been held as under: "54. In the present case, the appellant is having deep roots in the society. There is no possibility of him fleeing away from the country and not being available for facing the trial. In any case, conditions can be imposed to address the concern of the State. 55. Insofar as the apprehension given by the learned ASG regarding the possibility of tampering the evidence is concerned, it is to be noted that the case largely depends on documentary evidence which is already seized by the prosecution. As such, there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence. Insofar as the concern with regard to influencing the witnesses is concerned, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e the fair trial of the applicant, he be on bail unless there are overwhelming considerations otherwise. It is submitted that there are over 70 witnesses named in the prosecution complaint filed by the ED in the said ECIR. It has been four months since the arrest of the applicant in the present case and over two months since the date of filing of the prosecution complaint against the applicant. He submits that the arrest of applicant is completely malafide and he cannot be arrested twice for the same alleged offence. The applicant has already been subjected to illegal custody of the ED in relation to the same set of allegations and alleged transactions for a period of over 2.5 months. Since the Prosecution complaint against the applicant stood filed in the first ECIR there was no necessity of any arrest or custodial interrogation of the applicant and the applicant could not have been arrested in the same for the allegations for a second time. 30. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the ED had relied upon the same inadmissible material including some whatsapp chats which was not enough to make the applicant an accused in the Prosecution Complaint filed i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2013). 27. Section 4 of PMLA deals with punishment for money laundering. Prior to Amendment Act 2 of 2013, Section 4 provided punishment with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to seven years and the fine which may extend to Rs. 5,00,000/-. By Amendment Act 2 of 2013, Section 4 is amended w.e.f. 15.02.2013 vide S.O. 343(E) dated 08.02.2013. Now, the punishment prescribed under Section 4 of PMLA to the offender is rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to seven years and the offender is also liable to pay fine. The limit of fine has been done away with and now after the amendment, appropriate fine even above Rs. 5,00,000/- can be imposed against the offender. 29. The term "reason to believe" is not defined in PMLA. The expression "reason to believe" has been defined in Section 26 of IPC. As per the definition in Section 26 IPC, a person is said to have "reason to believe" a thing, if he has sufficient cause to believe that thing but not otherwise. The specified officer must have "reason to believe" on the basis of material in his possession that the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or authorised by him for the purposes of this section on the basis of the information in his possession has "reason to believe" (reason for such belief to be recorded in writing) that any person has committed an offence which constitutes the money laundering or is in possession of any proceeds of crime involved in money laundering etc. may search building, place and seize any record or property found as a result of such search. Section 17 of PMLA also uses the expression "reason to believe" and "reason for such belief to be recorded in writing". Here again, the authorised officer shall immediately on search and seizure or upon issuance of freezing order forward a copy of the reasons so recorded along with the material in his possession to the Adjudicating Authority in a "sealed envelope" in the manner as may be prescribed and such Adjudicating Authority shall keep such reasons and material for such period as may be prescribed. In order to ensure the sanctity of the search and seizure and to ensure the safeguards, in exercise of power under Section 73 of PMLA, the Central Government has framed "The Prevention of Money-Laundering (Forms, Search and Seizure or Freezing and the Manner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vis grounds of arrest in second ECIR and second Prosecution complaint shows that the basis of arresting the applicant in both the ECIRs is identical. There is no new material which has been relied upon by the ED in the second ECIR necessitating the arrest of the applicant. He submits that a departmental enquiry was also conducted by the Excise Department which concluded that there was no offence committed and the entire sale of liquor was carried out in a legal manner. It is contended that no new statement has been relied upon in the grounds of arrest. In the second ECIR, investigating the same offence is completely illegal and tenable in law. The arrest of the accused is amenable to judicial review and arresting a person without the need and necessity of arrest would render it to be illegal. It is further contended that there has been no recovery of any unaccounted money, incriminating material, illegal liquor bottles or counterfeit holograms from the applicant or any other individual to implicate the present applicant. It is contended that 115 properties have alleged POC of 105 crores attached and confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority. The said attachment has been challenged be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Constitution. As observed time and again, the prolonged incarceration before being pronounced guilty of an offence should not be permitted to become punishment without trial." 34. In the matter of Vijay Nair Vs. Directorate of Enforcement SLP Crl. Diary No. 22137 of 2024, it has been observed as under: "7. The materials on record indicate that one Dinesh Arora who was arrayed as an accused in the case and who thereafter turned approver, in his 12th statement had implicated the accused petitioner but in all his previous statement(s) given under Section 50 of the Act, there was no implication for the petitioner. The Directorate of Enforcement has submitted as many as 9 prosecution complaints, one after the other and in the meantime, the petitioner has been in custody for about 22 months. As earlier noted, in the event of conviction, the maximum sentence that can be imposed on the petitioner is 7 years. XXXX XXXX XXXX 9. Mr. S.V. Raju would further place reliance on the three-judge bench decision of this Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India2 to argue that stringent conditions of Bail under Section 45 of the Act have to be satisfied before gra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of P.Chidambaram Vs. CBI 2020 13 SCC 337, that while dealing with the bail application it is not in dispute that 'three factors' or the 'triple test' must be seen /satisfied viz. (I) flight risk; (ii) likelihood of tampering with evidence and (iii) likelihood of influencing witnesses. Pertinently all the three facts are satisfied by the applicant and as such the applicant may be granted bail. 38. Dr. Sourabh Pandey, in reply to the above contentions of the learned counsel for the applicant, it is submitted by learned counsel for the respondent/ED that that applicant acted as strongman who ran the liquor syndicate for his political benefactors and in association with the topmost bureaucrat Anil Tuteja. Both of them orchestrate the entire liquor scam by using the vantage of Anil Tuteja (retired IAS). The applicant posted officials of his choice in the Excise Department and thus became the de facto Excise Minister. He ran the entire bribe collection racket for Part-A, C and FL-10A license holders. He ran the unprecedented scam of selling unaccounted illicit liquor from the State run shops. The applicant through his political affiliations and with the active support of Anil Tuteja, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs for getting fixed share in the market purchase of CSMCL. Kedia Group got 52% share, Bhatia Group got 30% and Welcome Group go 18% share which was paid on percentage basis of the market share allotted to them. 41. From the investigation conducted by the respondent/Agency it was also revealed that the role of M/s. AJS Agro Pvt. Ltd. Which is associated with the applicant was used by the applicant to earn commission in banking channel. As part of the modus operandi the distillers purchased grians through the M/s. AJS Agro Trade Pvt. Ltd. and commission was paid to the applicant. This was done to generate accounted money which could be used to make more investments and large cash could be layered into those deals and was in continuous process of acquiring new proceeds of crime and layering and concealing the earned ill gotten cash. 42. It is alleged that the applicant and co-accused Anil Tuteja were receiving almost 15% of the revenue generated by the syndicate out of the sale of Part-B liquor. Asper the investigation conducted so far, a total of Rs. 40.67 lac cases of Part-B liquor have been found to be supplied to syndicate which implied that amount of Rs. 120 crores was ear....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich, on analysis of the decisions referred to above dealing with concerned enactments having similar twin conditions as valid, we must reject the challenge. Instead, we hold that the provision in the form of Section 45 of the 2002 Act, as applicable post amendment of 2018, is reasonable and has direct nexus with the purposes and objects 642 Supra at Footnote No.3450 sought to be achieved by the 2002 Act to combat the menace of money- laundering having transnational consequences including impacting the financial systems and sovereignty and integrity of the countries." 44. Further, in Sajjan Kumar Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2022 SCC Online Del. 1769, it has been held that: "27. In matter of regular bail, Court must consider aspects including but not limited to, the larger interest of the State or public-another factor relevant would be the gravity of the alleged offence and/or nature of allegations levelled- Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach, given their severity and magnitude." 45. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the applicant applied for bail in ACB/EOW case before this Court vide M.Cr.C.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for the respondent/ED is that the applicant was arrested in two different ECIRs ie. ECIR/RPZO/11/2022 and ECIR/RPZO/04/2024 and it is within the ambit of law. It is submitted that the applicant had filed SLP No. 12153/2024 against the order dated 20.08.2024 in Cr.M.P. No. 860/2024 and 1186/2024 of this Court wherein the applicant had raised allegation of double arrest, illegality of the ECIRs and malafide investigation but since there is no merit in the averment and not sustainable in the eye of law, he withdrew the petition on 6.12.2024. 49. Learned counsel for the respondent next contended that from the conduct of the applicant, it appears that he has been trying to delay the proceedings before the agency as well as before the court. In the matter of Pankaj Grover Vs. ED, Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No. 7661 of 2021, it has clearly been held that the accused in economic offences/PMLA cases are in possession of huge proceeds of crime and may use those to influence witnesses. It has also been held that since such offences are committed mostly be influential persons, there is high likelihood of their using influence to tamper with the ev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....esses or tampering with crucial evidences. Therefore in the present case, which pertains to the offence of money laundering to the tune of more than R. 2100 crores should not be granted bail. In catena of judgments, it has been held by the Court that economic offences constitute a separate class of offence and bail should normally not be granted in such cases. In Mohd. Arif Vs. ED 2020 SCC OnLine Ori. 544, it has been described that the impact of the offence of Money laundering has called the money laundering as an act of financial terrorism not only posing a serious threat to the financial system of the country but also to the integrity and sovereignty of a nation and reiterated the view of the Apex Court of denial of bail in cases of economic offences. Relevant observation is as under: "22. the offence of money laundering is nothing but an act of financial terrorism that poses a serious threat not only to the financial system of country but also the integrity and sovereignty of a nation. The International Monetary Fund estimates that laundered money generates about $590 billion to $1.5 trillion per year, which constitutes approximately two to five percent of the world....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the Community. 53. In view of the above legal grounds, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that the bail application filed on behalf of the applicant may be dismissed. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that the role of the applicant in the present case established the guilt of the applicant in the commission of the offence of money laundering. It is also reiterated that satisfaction of triple test is not sufficient for persons arrested under PMLA, 2002 as this triple test stage will come when the applicant satisfy the twin conditions given under the Section 45 of the PMLA, 2002. The Apex Court in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu and Others Vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh (1978) 1 SCC 240, has observed that the objective to keep a person in judicial custody pending trial or disposal of an appeal is to secure the attendance of the prisoner at trial. Moreover, he submits that the delay in trial is no ground....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the applicant was arrested in two different ECIRs. Oit is submitted that the applicant filed application before this Court wherein he has also alleged about the same however, the same was dismissed by the Division Bench vide its order dated 23.08.2024 in Cr.M.P. No. 2276/2024 holding that: "15. We have perused the order dated 08.08.2024 passed by the Special Judge (PMLA). The ED had filed an application under Section 167 Cr.P.C. and prayed for 7 days custodial remand against the petitioner-Anwar Dhebar and one co-accused Arunpati Tripathi on the ground that the investigation was incomplete. The true copy Registrar (Judicial) order dated 08.08.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, PMLA is quite detailed one and it has assigned the reasons for allowing. The petitioner had taken a plea before the learned Special Judge that the ECIR/RPZO/11/2022 was already quashed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and as such, the second ECIR was not maintainable on the basis of some materials. This issue has also been dealt with by this Court in Cr.M.P. No. 721/2024." 55. It is further submitted that this Court after considering the facts and circumstances of the present case has passed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice and repeating the offence, the possibility of tampering with the witnesses and obstructing the courts as well as the criminal antecedents of the accused. It is also well settled that the Court must not go into deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail. All that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused." 57. It is contended that the proceeds of crime to the tune of about 105 crores was attached and the same has been confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 7.10.2024 in OC No. 2318/2024. It is submitted that detailed modus operandi used by the applicant for generation and use of proceeds of crime is mentioned in the Prosecution Complaint dated 5.10.2024 along with money trial investigation. It is further submitted that the statements were recorded without any threat, fear, force or coercion and under CCTV surveillance. From the evidence it is clear that the applicant is involved in the Chhattisgarh Liquor Scam case. The fact that there is no recovery of unaccounted money, incriminating material, counterfeit holograms etc. from ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....man who ran the liquor syndicate for his political benefactors in association with the topmost bureaucrat Anil Tuteja. The applicant ran the entire bribe collection racket for Part-A,C and FL-10A license Holders and the unprecedented scam of selling unaccounted liquor from the State run shops. This apart, he was responsible for acquisition of process of crime and concealing them. 62. The Apex Court has held that the power of ED to arrest must be based on objective and fair consideration of material against a person. Under the PMLA, ED officers can arrest a person if they have reasons to believe based on the material in their possession that the individual is guilty. The provision for bail under Section 45 of PMLA lays down two essentials which are to be fulfilled for grant of bail. These conditions are called the 'twin conditions'. The two conditions that are to be established are that firstly, there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and secondly, the accused is not likely to commit an offence while on bail. 63. In Nikesh Tarachand Shah Vs. Union of India (Tarachand), the Apex Court decided on the constitutionality of section ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....derscores the differences between the offences on the basis of their gravity and seriousness. The SC, in the case P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement of 2019, stated that in determining whether to grant bail both the seriousness of the crime, and the severity of the punishment are to be taken into account. In the case, bail was granted on the following grounds - firstly, the allegations against the accused were not severe; secondly, possibility of the accused tampering with evidence was low; and thirdly, humanitarian grounds like the health of the accused were considered. 67. A provision like section 45, being as rigid as it is, does not allow for such an analysis. In the interest of upholding the fundamental rights of the citizens, the legislature must relax the provision to provide wiggle room to the courts to determine bail on a more case-to-case basis. This would prevent minor bail cases reaching the apex court as the lower courts are hesitant to oppose the inflexible provision. Nevertheless, the court should also recognize the legislature's wariness towards money laundering and pass orders such that it balances caution with liberty. 68. A balanced approach which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l or otherwise. On perusal of the records, it is found that the ED has shown the reason to believe that the applicant is guilty of the proceeds of crime. On the basis of statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA however, retraction statement is made by the co-accused persons namely Arun Pati Tripathi, Nitesh Purohit and Arvind Singh. 72. The confessional statement of a co-accused under Section 50 of the PMLA is otherwise, not a substantive piece of evidence and can be used only for the purpose of corroboration in support of other evidence to impart assurance to the Court in arriving at a conclusion of guilt.It is expedient for this Court to extract Section 45 of the PML Act, 2002, which reads as under:- "Section 45 of PMLA, 2002- Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable.- (1) [Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), no person accused of an offence [under this Act] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless-] (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release; and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), no person accused of an offence [under this Act] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless-] (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release; and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail: Provided that a person, who, is under the age of sixteen years, or is a woman or is sick or infirm [or is accused either on his own or along with other co-accused of money- laundering a sum of less than one crore rupees], may be released on bail, if the Special Court so directs: Provided further that the Special Court shall not take cognizance of any offence punishable under Section 4 except upon a complaint in writing made by- (i) the Director; or (ii) any officer of the Central Government or a State Government authorized in writing in this behalf by the Central Government by a general or special order made in this behalf by that Government. [(1-A) Notw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l going on. Merely because, for the predicated offences the charge sheet might have been filed it cannot be a ground to release the accused on bail in connection with the scheduled offences under the PML Act, 2002. Investigation for the predicated offences and the investigation by the Enforcement Directorate for the scheduled offences under the PML Act are different and distinct. Therefore, the High Court has taken into consideration the irrelevant consideration. The investigation by the Enforcement Directorate for the scheduled offences under the PML Act, 2002 is till going on. 7. As observed hereinabove, the High Court has neither considered the rigour of Section 45 of the PML Act, 2002 nor has considered the seriousness of the offences alleged against accused for the scheduled offences under the PML Act, 2002 and the High Court has not at all considered the fact that the investigation by the Enforcement Directorate for the scheduled offences under the PML Act, 2002 is still going on and therefore, the impugned orders passed by the High Court enlarging respective respondent No. 1 on bail are unsustainable and the matters are required to be remitted back to the High Court....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the PMLA are admissible in evidence, but their thorough consideration should be reserved for the trial court. It emphasized that at the bail stage, these statements can be examined to ascertain whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is not guilty. There is a difference between the admissibility of a statement of an accused recorded under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and its evidentiary value. 76. In view of the aforesaid, it can be foreseen that while the High Court in the specific facts and circumstances (where there was prima facie material against the petitioner) came to the conclusion that mere possession of proceeds of crime and upholding such proceeds as untainted would be sufficient to invoke the provisions of PMLA, however, the ratio of the said judgment may have the potential to have an unintended fallout in a different set of facts. Depending on the facts of the case, such an interpretation may include persons who might have no genuine knowledge and connection with the predicate offence and/ or the tainted money circulated by the actual accused persons and may have to go through the rigours of trial for no fau....