TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 933
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct, 2002, based on FIR bearing No. 13/2019 registered by Anti-Corruption Bureau, Jamshedpur under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (amended as on 2018) [hereinafter referred to as P.C. Act, 2018] pending in the court of learned A.J.C. XVIII-cum-Special Judge, PML Act, Ranchi. Factual Matrix of the Case 2. An ECIR bearing No. ECIR/RNSZO/16/2020 was recorded on 17.09.2020 based on the FIR bearing No. 13/2019 dated 13.11.2019, registered by ACB Jamshedpur, under section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, (amended as on 2018). Subsequently, Charge-sheet dated 11.01.2020 was submitted by ACB against Alok Ranjan and Suresh Prasad Verma under Section 7 (b) of P.C. Act, 2018 and under Sections 120B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, which are scheduled offences under Part-A, Paragraph 1 of the PML Act, 2002. 3. During the course of investigation upon Veerendra Kumar Ram and his close associates, several searches were conducted under Section 17 PML Act 2002 to investigate the role of the accused persons and their close associates, wherein it was found that part of the proceeds of crime is acquired in the form of commission/bribe in lieu of allotment of tenders by Ve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under section 17 of the PMLA, 2002 in the premises of Sanjeev Kumar Lal, Jahangir Alam, Munna Singh, Kuldip Kumar Minz, Vikash Kumar, Raj Kumar Toppo, Ajay Tirkey, Rajiv Kumar Singh, Amit Kumar and Santosh Kumar at various places. 10. As a result of the search, huge cash was recovered and seized from the residential premises of Jahangir Alam situated at Flat No. 1A, Sir Syed Residency, Kumhartoli, Ranchi. Further, huge cash have been recovered and seized from the residential premises of Munna Singh situated at Flat No. 1A, Kashmiri Gali, PP Compound, Ranchi. Munna Singh stated that he used to collect cash from the engineers/contractors on the instruction of Sanjeev Lal. Thereafter, searches were also conducted at the residences of these engineers viz. Rajiv Kumar, Santosh Kumar, Rajkumar Toppo, Ajay Tirkey and Amit Kumar. 11. Accordingly, on 07-05-2024 Sanjeev Kumar Lal and Jahangir Alam were arrested for the commission of the offence under sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA, 2002. 12. Alamgir Alam (present petitioner) being the minister of Department of Rural Works (RWD) and all the departments under it, he is at the top in the syndicate of commission collection. Sanjeev Kumar Lal u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion to harass the petitioner. II. The petitioner has duly cooperated with the investigation agency and further as and when required he appeared before them despite that he has been arrested in the present case. III. The petitioner is a sitting M.L.A. of the Jharkhand State Legislative Assembly having portfolio of Rural Development Department but the petitioner was not the minister at the relevant period of time, when it is alleged that 'proceeds of crime' was collected by way of commission in awarding tender. IV. It is admitted fact that neither the petitioner was named in the initial predicate offence [FIR No. 13/2019] nor he was named in the ECIR. Therefore, petitioner's involvement cannot be made out on the ground of demand of gratification since the petitioner was not minister at the relevant point of time and hence there was no question of implicating the present petitioner of any demand to be made by him of its share. V. Furthermore, the petitioner even cannot be implicated for the offence said to be committed in the financial year 2014-15; 2015-16; 2016-17; 2018-19 since, he was not the Minister during the relevant time. VI. The first occurrence of committing offe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding commission from his agent by deputing the agent to collect the money by way of commission in lieu of allotting the work in favour of one or the other contractor. It has been submitted that in absence of any predicate offence no case can be said to be made out or even initiated under Section 3 of the PMLA Act. XI. From the accusation, it is evident that allegation has been leveled that Rs. 3 Crores was given to the petitioner through his private secretary, namely, Sanjeev Kumar Lal but said Sanjeev Kumar Lal in his statement recorded under Section 17 and 50 of the Act, 2002 has nowhere stated that after collecting the amount from the engineers he had delivered a single penny to the petitioner. XII. Even from perusal of entire record, it is evident that there is no evidence to prove that any amount of commission reached to the hand of petitioner. It is stated that cash totaling Rs. 37.55 crores approx. has been recovered from the various premises of Sanjeev Kumar Lal, Jahangir Alam and other persons but none of them have stated that they had paid any amount of commission directly to the petitioner. XIII. Furthermore, from the entire complaint as well as the documents of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act of the co-accused, who was already in custody, hence, the statement recorded under Section 50 of the PML Act of the co-accused, who were already in custody cannot be used against the present petitioner. XX. Submission has been made that according to Section 19 of the PML Act, arrest can only be effectuated when there are valid 'reasons to believe', that the person is guilty of offence under PMLA and such 'reasons to believe' must be founded on credible and substantive material evidence and the same has been reduced in writing and furnished to the arrestee as has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arvind Kejriwal Vs. Directorate of Enforcement [2024 SCC OnLine 1703] but the principles as laid down in the said case has not been complied with in the instant case. XXI. Learned senior counsel has relied upon paragraph 253 of the case of the Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors., (2022) SCC OnLine SC 929 in order to buttress his argument on the issue of statement recorded under Section 50 of the PML Act. XXII. Raising the ground of parity, submission has been made that taking the ground of long incarceration and further there is no possi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sly opposed the said submission/ground both based upon the fact and the law as referred hereinabove, on the following grounds. I. Submission has been made that the argument that merely because petitioner was not the minister on the date when the FIR No. 13 of 2019 was registered or he was not the minister on the collection of the money for the financial year 2014-15; 2015-16; 2016-17; 2018-19, is having no aid to the petitioner reason being that the applicability of Section 3 of the PML Act wherein specific stipulation has been made that whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use and projecting or claiming it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering. II. It has been contended by referring to Section 3(ii) of the PML Act, 2002 that the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment or possession or acquisition o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... value of any such property or where such property is taken or held outside the country, then the property equivalent in value held within the country or abroad. It has been contended that the statement, as has been recorded under Section 50 of the PML Act, 2002 is very much clear of the involvement of the present petitioner in relation to collection of money involved in the criminal case registered under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 and by way of continued process, the ED has filed supplementary complaint in which complicity of the present petitioner has been surfaced. VII. Argument has been advanced that the petitioner being minister, people representative, has been found to be indulged in such type of collection of money as has been recovered from the house of the Jahangir Alam to the tune of Rs. 32,20,78,900/- having been corroborated by the private secretary to the minister, namely, Sanjeev Kumar Lal and further the aforesaid fact has been corroborated by the statement as recorded under Section 50 of the different accused persons and the engineers who were not in custody during the relevant period of time. VIII. Submission has been made that groun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y offence while on bail. XII. It has been submitted that twin conditions have been provided under Section 45 of the Act 2002 but herein the first condition is of bearing which pertains to the satisfaction of the court of the reasonable ground for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and there is no likelihood of committing any offence while on bail. It has been submitted based upon the grounds i.e., recovery of huge amount from the house of Jahangir Alam, a close associate of the petitioner and co-accused Sanjeev Kumar Lal, who is private Secretary to the minister; the recovery of the diary having with code-word therein for the purpose of transmitting the amount as also the scripted letter head addressed to the minister have been found from the house of Jahangir Alam where huge amount of money has been recovered, hence, it is not a case to have the believe of reasonable ground that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence. XIII. So far as the grounds of parity is concerned, the case of the present petitioner is quite distinct to that of other co-accused persons, who have been granted bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court, not only on the long incarceration but as also on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e proceeds of crime. 25. The issues were debated threadbare in the United Nation Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Basle Statement of Principles enunciated in 1989, the FATF established at the summit of seven major industrial nations held in Paris from 14th to 16thJuly, 1989, the Political Declaration and Noble Programme of Action adopted by United Nations General Assembly vide its Resolution No. S-17/2 of 23.2.1990, the United Nations in the Special Session on countering World Drug Problem Together concluded on the 8th to the 10thJune, 1998, urging the State parties to enact a comprehensive legislation. This is evident from the introduction and Statement of Objects and Reasons accompanying the Bill which became the 2002 Act. The same reads thus: "INTRODUCTION Money-laundering poses a serious threat not only to the financial systems of countries, but also to their integrity and sovereignty. To obviate such threats international community has taken some initiatives. It has been felt that to prevent money-laundering and connected activities a comprehensive legislation is urgently needed. To achieve this objective the Prevention of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ering World Drug Problem Together concluded on the 8th to the 10th June, 1998 has made another declaration regarding the need to combat money-laundering. India is a signatory to this declaration." 26. It is thus evident that the Act, 2002 was enacted in order to answer the urgent requirement to have a comprehensive legislation inter alia for preventing money-laundering, attachment of proceeds of crime, adjudication and confiscation thereof for combating money-laundering and also to prosecute the persons indulging in the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime. 27. It needs to refer herein the definition of "proceeds of crime" as provided under Section 2(1)(u) of the Act, 2002 which reads as under: "2(u) "proceeds of crime" means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property [or where such property is taken or held outside the country, then the property equivalent in value held within the country] [or abroad]; [Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that "proceeds of crime" include property not only derived or ob....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h offences is [one crore rupees] or more; or (iii) the offences specified under Part C of the Schedule." 33. It is evident that the "scheduled offence" means the offences specified under Part A of the Schedule; or the offences specified under Part B of the Schedule if the total value involved in such offences is [one crore rupees] or more; or the offences specified under Part C of the Schedule. 34. The offence of money laundering has been defined under Section 3 of the Act, 2002 which reads as under: "3. Offence of money-laundering. -Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the [proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use and projecting or claiming] it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering. [Explanation.- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that,- (i) a person shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering if such person is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to indulge or knowingly assisted or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in one or more of the follo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Director, Additional Director, Joint Director, Deputy Director or Assistant Director shall have power to summon any person whose attendance he considers necessary whether to give evidence or to produce any records during the course of any investigation or proceeding under this Act. (3) All the persons so summoned shall be bound to attend in person or through authorised agents, as such officer may direct, and shall be bound to state the truth upon any subject respecting which they are examined or make statements, and produce such documents as may be required. (4) Every proceeding under sub-sections (2) and (3) shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of section 193 and section 228 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). (5) Subject to any rules made in this behalf by the Central Government, any officer referred to in sub-section (2) may impound and retain in his custody for such period, as he thinks fit, any records produced before him in any proceedings under 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 130. In Apparel Export Promotion Council v. A.K. Chopra, the Court observed that domestic Courts are under an obligation to give due regard to the international conventions and norms for construing the domestic laws, more so, when there is no inconsistency between them and there is a void in domestic law. This view has been restated in Githa Hariharan, as also in People's Union for Civil Liberties, and National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India." 40. The implication of Section 50 has also been taken into consideration. Relevant paragraph, i.e., paragraphs-327 to 332, 338, 339, 342 are quoted as under: "327. The validity of this provision has been challenged on the ground of being violative of Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution. For, it allows the authorised officer under the 2002 Act to summon any person and record his statement during the course of investigation. Further, the provision mandates that the person should disclose true and correct facts known to his personal knowledge in connection with the subject matter of investigation. The person is also obliged to sign the statement so given with the threat of being punished for the falsity or incorrectness....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed of any offence at the relevant time and is being compelled to be a witness against himself. This position is well-established. 332. The Constitution Bench of this Court in M.P. Sharma had dealt with a similar challenge wherein warrants to obtain documents required for investigation were issued by the Magistrate being violative of Article 20(3) of the Constitution. This Court opined that the guarantee in Article 20(3) is against "testimonial compulsion" and is not limited to oral evidence. Not only that, it gets triggered if the person is compelled to be a witness against himself, which may not happen merely because of issuance of summons for giving oral evidence or producing documents. Further, to be a witness is nothing more than to furnish evidence and such evidence can be furnished by different modes. The Court went on to observe as follows: "Broadly stated the guarantee in article 20(3) is against "testimonial compulsion". It is suggested that this is confined to the oral evidence of a person standing his trial for an offence when called to the witness-stand. We can see no reason to confine the content of the constitutional guarantee to this barely literal import. So to l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on any person for collection of information and evidence to be presented before the Adjudicating Authority. It is not necessarily for initiating a prosecution against the noticee as such. The power entrusted to the designated officials under this Act, though couched as investigation in real sense, is to undertake inquiry to ascertain relevant facts to facilitate initiation of or pursuing with an action regarding proceeds of crime, if the situation so warrants and for being presented before the Adjudicating Authority. It is a different matter that the information and evidence so collated during the inquiry made, may disclose commission of offence of money-laundering and the involvement of the person, who has been summoned for making disclosures pursuant to the summons issued by the Authority. At this stage, there would be no formal document indicative of likelihood of involvement of such person as an accused of offence of money laundering. If the statement made by him reveals the offence of money laundering or the existence of proceeds of crime, that becomes actionable under the Act itself. 339.To put it differently, at the stage of recording of statement for the purpose of inquir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fence has been considered in the aforesaid judgment wherein by taking into consideration the explanation as inserted by way of Act 23 of 2019 under the definition of the "proceeds of crime" as contained under Section 2(1)(u), whereby and whereunder, it has been clarified for the purpose of removal of doubts that, the "proceeds of crime" 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, meaning thereby, the words "any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence" will come under the fold of the proceeds of crime. 43. So far as the purport of Section 45(1)(i)(ii) is concerned, the aforesaid provision starts from the non-obstante clause that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, 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 a opportunity to oppose the application for such release; and (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t issue to be answered by us is: whether the twin conditions, in law, continued to remain on the statute book post decision of this Court in Nikesh Tarachand Shah and if yes, in view of the amendment effected to Section 45(1) of the 2002 Act vide Act 13 of 2018, the declaration by this Court will be of no consequence. This argument need not detain us for long. We say so because the observation in State of Manipur in paragraph 29 of the judgment that owing to the declaration by a Court that the statute is unconstitutional obliterates the statute entirely as though it had never been passed, is contextual. In this case, the Court was dealing with the efficacy of the repealing Act. While doing so, the Court had adverted to the repealing Act and made the stated observation in the context of lack of legislative power. In the process of reasoning, it did advert to the exposition in Behram Khurshid Pesikaka and Deep Chand including American jurisprudence expounded in Cooley on Constitutional Limitations and Norton v. Shelby County." 47. Subsequently, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Tarun Kumar vs. Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement, (2023) SCC OnLine SC 1486 by taking int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enefit of bail is to be adhered to which has been dealt with by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. (supra) wherein it has been observed that the accused is not guilty of the offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. 50. In the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.(supra) as under paragraph 284, it has been held that the Authority under the 2002 Act, is to prosecute a person for offence of money-laundering only if it has reason to believe, which is required to be recorded in writing that the person is in possession of "proceeds of crime". Only if that belief is further supported by tangible and credible evidence indicative of involvement of the person concerned in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime, action under the Act can be taken to forward for attachment and confiscation of proceeds of crime and until vesting thereof in the Central Government, such process initiated would be a standalone process. 51. So far as the issue of grant of bail under Section 45 of the Act, 2002 is concerned, at paragraph-412 of the j....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....visions 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 Act. Therefore, the conditions enumerated in Section 45 of PMLA will have to be complied with even in respect of an application for bail made under Section 439 CrPC. That coupled with the provisions of Section 24 provides that unless the contrary is proved, the authority or the Court shall presume that proceeds of crime are involved in money-laundering and the burden to prove that the proceeds of crime are not involved, lies on the appellant." 54. Now adverting to the fact of the present case, learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegation leveled against the present petitioner cannot be said to attract the ingredient of Section 3 of PMLA. While on the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the ED has submitted by referring to various paragraphs of prosecution complaint that the offence is very much available attracting the offence under provisions of PML Act. 55. This ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....esides at Booty Road, Ranchi which is a government accommodation. During analysis of the seized mobile phone of Veerendra Kumar Ram, contact details of Sanjeev Kumar Lal was found as 'Sanjeev Lal PA of RDD Minister' and two mobile nos. (9939121851 and 8789745592) are saved in the said contact's name. Further, SDR, CAF and CDR of the aforesaid mobile nos, were sought and it was revealed that the mobile no. 9939121851 is in the name of Sanjeev Kumar Lal himself. However, another mobile no. 8789745592 was found to be in the name of Jahangir Alam, S/o-Ekramul Haque. Thus, it became evident that Jahangir Alam is a close associate of Sanjeev Kumar Lal and the Jahangir acts as a close trusted aid of Sanjeev Kumar Lal. Further, analysis of the CDR and tower location of both mobile nos. was also made and it was found that they live in very close proximity to the government accommodation and it was found during search that they were residing in the same government residence. Further, it was gathered that there is a flat in the name of Jahangir Alam which was used by Sanjeev Kumar Lal for secreting the proceeds of crime. It was also gathered that the wife of Sanjeev Lal @ Sanjeev ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ahangir Alam, some Engineers and other persons on different dates. As a result of search, huge amount of cash to the tune of Rs. 37.55 Crore, digital devices, records and various incriminating documents were recovered which gave details with regard to the various individuals involved in the process of generation and distribution of proceeds of crime. Statement of various Chief Engineers/Engineers of RWD, JSRRDA and RDSD were recorded u/s 50 of PMLA, 2002 wherein they have inter alia stated that commission is collected by the engineers/officials from contractors/companies/firms against tender allocation in the RWD, JSRRDA and RDSD departments. The commission of 3% of the total amount mentioned in LOA (Letter of Acceptance) is fixed for tender allotment, the distribution of which among the Minister, bureaucrats, engineers and other officials is distributed as - (a) 1.35%- Minister, Alamgir Alam (through his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal; (b) 1.65% Top bureaucrats and other engineers/officials. They also stated that the collection of commission for minister, Alamgir Alam, has been done by Sanjeev Kumar Lal through his person/agent and for other persons the commission has been collected by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etter of Acceptance) is fixed for tender allotment, the distribution of which among the Minister, bureaucrats, engineers and other officials is distributed as under: (a) 1.35%- Minister, Alamgir Alam (through his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal) (b) 1.65% Top bureaucrats and other engineers/officials They also stated that the collection of commission for minister Alamgir Alam has been done by Sanjeev Kumar Lal through his person/agent and for other persons the commission has been collected by Chief Engineer, JSRRDA himself and, through his selected persons. 8.4 Further, From the statements of Sanjeev Kumar Lal and aforesaid Chief Engineers/Engineers of RWD, JSRRDA and RDSD the modus operandi of allocation of Tenders and collection of commission against the tenders has surfaced which is detailed as under: (i) The modus operandi regarding collection of commission against allotment tenders starts with the floating of tenders by RWD, RDSD and JSRRDA for the construction of roads, bridges and other government buildings in Jharkhand. Firstly, the Government takes decision to construct road/bridge, the Detailed Project Report (DPR) is prepared by Executive Engineer. Thereafter, the techn....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant to this investigation is as under: 10.1. Veerendra Kumar Ram: Veerendra Kumar Ram is a chief engineer in Rural Department Special Zone and also in additional charge of Rural Works Department. In his statement recorded u/s 50 of PMLA during custodial interrogation and in judicial custody on different dates wherein he inter alia accepted that commission was taken in lieu of allotment of tenders and that the total commission was 3.2% of tender value and that his share of commission was 0.3% of the total tender amount which varies from 0.3% to 1%. The share of Minister Alamgir Alam is around 1.5% of the allocated tender amount. He further stated that the whole process of collection and distribution of commission was taken care of by the assistant engineers posted at Rural Development Special Zone and Rural Works Department. He further stated that Rs. 3 crores were given to Alamgir Alam by engineers of Rural Works Department through his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal in September 2022. During analysis of the seized mobile phone of Veerendra Kumar Ram, contact details of Sanjeev Lal was found as 'Sanjeev Lal PA of RDD Minister' and two mobile nos. (9939121851 and 8789745592) are sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on his instructions. 10.4. Jahangir Alam: He is a close aide of Sanjeev Kumar Lal. He was arrested on 07.05.2024 and during his ED custodial interrogation u/s 50 of PMLA, 2002, he showed complete non-cooperation, by not divulging the true facts about Rs. 32.20 crore initially, which are the Proceeds of Crime acquired by Alamgir Alam and Sanjeev Kumar Lal and other seized records and documents. He further stated that the cash amount seized from his said premises belongs to Sanjeev Kumar Lal, and he collected the aforesaid huge cash amount i.e. Rs. 32.20 Crore on the instructions of Sanjeev Kumar Lal. He further stated that about 4 to 5 months ago Sanjeev Kumar Lal instructed him to stand near Abhinandan Marriage hall, near Rani Hospital and Deendayal Nagar, Ranchi with his Aprilia scooter bearing, where Rinku alias Santosh Kumar (brother of Munna Singh) handed over bags filled with currency/note bundles, and after receiving those bags, he used to park the said bags beneath bed and almirah at his Flat No. 1A, Sir Syed Residency, Kumhartoli, Ranchi safely. He has also taken cash around Rs. 40.40 Lakhs from Sanjeev Kumar Lal and invested the same in immovable and movable properti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the instructions of Sanjeev Kumar Lal. Munna Singh further stated that he showed his inability and objected against the collection of cash and he tried to know the source of funds from Sanjeev Kumar Lal, however, Sanjeev Kumar Lal never revealed him the actual source of the cash collected. Sanjeev Kumar Lal always told him that there would be no issue in aforesaid task. 10.7. Santosh Kumar alias Rinku: Statements of Santosh Kumar alias Rinku, brother of Munna Singh were recorded u/s 50 of PMLA wherein he inter alia stated that he following the instructions of Sanjeev Kumar Lal has collected the commission/cash from the Chief and other engineers, and handed over the same to the person of Sanjeev Kumar Lal. He further stated that he has received cash-several times from various persons. 10.8. Rajkumar Toppo: Statement of Rajkumar Toppo, Executive Engineer was recorded u/s 50 of PMLA wherein he inter alia stated that he was aware of the fact that the commission was collected by the engineers/official from Contractors/companies/firms in lieu of allocation of tender in the departments. He further stated that the commission is 3% of total LOA, for the allotment of tenders. The said ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Alam has been handed over to Sanjeev Kumar Lal. 10.11. Ashok Kumar Gupta: Statement of Ashok Kumar Gupta, Executive Engineer was recorded u/s 50 of PMLA wherein he inter alia stated that he was aware of the fact that the commission was collected by the engineers/official from contractors/companies/firms in lieu of allocation of tender in the departments. He further stated that the commission is 3% of total LOA, for allotment of tenders. The said 3% commission amount is distributed as under: (a) 1.35%- Minister, Alamgir Alam (through his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal) (b) 1.65% Top bureaucrats and other engineers/officials He further stated that on the instructions of Sanjeev Kumar Lal and his Chief-Engineers Singrai Tuti and Pramod Kumar he has collected around Rs. 10.50 Crore commission from the contractors. He further stated that he along with Ajay Kumar had handed over Rs. 4.72 Crores to Sanjeev Kumar Lal as share of Minister Alamgir Alam. 10.12. Santosh Kumar: Statement of Santosh Kumar, Executive Engineer was recorded u/s 50 of PMLA wherein he inter alia stated that he was aware of the fact that the commission was collected by the engineers/official from contractors/compani....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of tenders. The said 3% commission amount is distributed as under: (a) 1.35% Minister, Alamgir Alam (through his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal) (b) 1.65% Top bureaucrats and other engineers/officials He further stated that on the instructions of Sanjeev Kumar Lal, PS to Alamgir Alam he has collected around Rs. 15 Crore through Assistant Engineers and the same was handed over to Rajeev Kumar Singh, his known one, and further Rajeev Kumar Singh handed over the same to Munna Singh for giving it to Sanjeev Kumar Lal. 10.15. Pramod Kumar: Statement of Pramod Kumar, Chief-Engineer, JSRRDA was recorded u/s 50 of PMLA wherein he inter alia stated that he was aware of the fact that the commission was collected by the engineers/official from contractors/companies/firms in lieu of allocation of tender in the departments under his portfolios. He further stated that the commission is 3% of total LOA, for the allotment of tenders. The said 3% commission amount is distributed as under: (a) 1.35%- Minister, Alamgir Alam (through his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal) (b) 1.65% Top bureaucrats and other engineers/officials He further stated that on the instructions of Sanjeev Kumar Lal, PS to Alamgir Ala....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s 50 of PMLA wherein he inter alia stated that he was aware of the fact that the commission was collected by the engineers/official from contractors/companies/firms in lieu of allocation of tender in the departments under portfolio of Chief Engineer Singrai Tuti. He further stated that the commission is 3% of total LOA, for allotment of tenders. The said 3% commission amount is distributed as under: (a) 1.35% Minister, Alamgir Alam (through his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal) (b) 1.65% Top bureaucrats and other engineers/officials He further stated that during his period as superintending engineer in JSRRDA he has collected around Rs. 3.5 to 3.8 Crore commission amount from contractors through his executive/assistant Engineers on behalf of his Chief-Engineer Singrai Tuti and further handed over to the person of Sanjeev Kumar Lal. 10.19. Siddhant Kumar: Statement of Siddhant Kumar, Executive Engineer, RDSZ was recorded u/s 50 of PMLA wherein he inter alia stated that Veerendra Kumar Ram instructed and pressurized him to receive commission in lieu of allotment of tenders. Similar was the statement of other engineers, as mentined in the prosecution complaint. 59. From the statement....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....search proceedings. e) Further, it is ascertained from the statement of Veerendra Kumar Ram and Sanjeev Kumar Lal that Alamgir Alam also acquired a commission amount of Rs. 3 crores from Veerendra Kumar Ram through one engineer of the department and same transaction was also assisted by Sanjeev Kumar Lal in September 2022. f) Thus, Alamgir Alam is found to be directly indulged and actually involved in possession and concealment of atleast Rs 35 crores of the Proceeds of Crime through Sanjeev Kumar Lal and he has also found to be directly indulged and actually involved in acquisition and concealment of atleast Rs. 56 crores of the Proceeds of Crime. 2. Sanjeev Kumar Lal (Accused No.-12): a) He is the PS to Minister Alamgir Alam, and he has misused his official position for collection of commission on behalf of Minister Alamgir Alam. b) He has pressurised, threatened and instructed the Chief-Engineers and other engineers to collect commission and give him the share of Minister Alamgir Alam. c) He is the person who is controlling whole syndicate of collection of commission against tenders from top to bottom on behalf of Minister Alamgir Alam. d) He instructed Santosh Kum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is commission amount against tenders i.e. Proceeds of Crime and invested the same in immovable and movable properties in his name. He has purchased immovable properties, flat at Sir Syed Residency and plot at Pundag, Ranchi. (e) Jahangir Alam is the key person who has facilitated the movement and hiding of cash/commission i.e. Proceeds of Crime. (f) He is found to be directly indulged, actually involved and knowingly assisted Sanjeev Kumar Lal in acquisition, possession and concealment of the Proceeds of Crime at least to the tune of Rs. 50 crores approx. and jewellery worth Rs. 14.50 lakhs approx. (g) He is found to be directly indulged and actually involved and knowingly assisted Sanjeev Kumar Lal in utilisation, possession and concealment of Proceeds of Crime to the tune of Rs. 1,10,25,000/- for purchasing two immovable properties in his own name and claimed the proceeds of crime as untainted, which were attached u/s 5(1) of the PMLA, 2002 and also being prayed for confiscation vide this PC. (h) Jahangir Alam has also found to be actually involved and knowingly assisted Sanjeev Kumar Lal in utilising Proceeds of crime in purchasing one vehicle viz. Tata Harrier having Re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....als from contractors/companies/firms against tender allocation in the RWD, JSRRDA and RDSD departments. The commission of 3% of the total amount mentioned in LOA (Letter of Acceptance) is fixed for tender allotment, the distribution of which among the Minister, Alamgir Alam (through his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal) was 1.35%. 66. Thus, from the complaint it appears that apart from huge cash as mentioned above, several documents including letters on official letterheads were found from the premise of Jahangir Alam, which were kept there on the instructions of, Sanjeev Kumar Lal, as PS to Alamgir Alam RDD minister, which indicates that Sanjeev Kumar Lal was using the said premise of Jahangir Alam as a safe house for keeping cash, documents/records and other belongings. 67. Thus, from perusal of the entire prosecution complaint prima facie it appears that the whole modus-operandi regarding collection of commission and later distribution has been illustrated to the respondent ED by the co-accused Veerendra Kumar Ram and Sanjeev Kumar Lal, during their statement's u/s 50 of PMLA, which are mentioned in Para-10.1 and 10.3 of the prosecution complaint dated 04.07.2024. 68. Further, the simila....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve 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 the 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 [Nimmagadda Prasad v. CBI, (2013) 7 SCC 466 : (2013) 3 SCC (Cri) 575], 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. 72. This Court is now re-adverting to the fact of the case. On perusal of the Paras-8.16, 8.18, 8.19, 8.20 & 8.26 of the prosecution complaint where the images of the hand written notes etc. have been mentioned/displayed, which depicts that the accounting of the co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(1) directly or indirectly attempts to indulge, or (n) knowingly assists or, (im) knowingly is a party, or (iv) is actually involved in any process or activity. Such process or activity should be connected to "proceeds of crime " including its concealment or possession or acquisition or use. In addition, a person involved in such process or activity connected to proceeds of crime, should be projecting or claiming it as untainted property. The Explanation under Section 3 makes it clear that even if the involvement is in one or more of the following activities or processes, namely: (i) concealment; (ii) possession; (iii) acquisition; (iv) use; (v) projecting it as untainted property, or (vi) claiming it as untainted property, the offence of money-laundering will be made out. 20. Thus, Section 3 comprises of two essential limbs, namely: (i) involvement in any process or activity, and (ii) connection of such process or activity to the proceeds of crime. The expression "proceeds of crime" is defined in Section 2(1)(u) to mean any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the petitioner the directions of the Hon'ble Court given in the cases of Pankaj Bansal vs Union of India 2023 SCC Online SC 1244 and Ram Kishore Arora vs Directorate of Enforcement, 2023 SCC Online SC 1682 have been fully complied as the grounds mentioned explicitly in a separate memo handed over to the petitioner in writing before his arrest u/s 19 of PMLA, 2002 on 15.05.2024. Further, petitioner had never challenged the arrest or remand order which was passed by learned court after considering the material and other evidence supporting the arrest. 83. Argument has been advanced by referring to provision of Section 22 of the PML Act, 2002 wherein it has been provided of presumption as to records or property in certain cases, in which it is provided that where any records or property are or is found in the possession or control of any person in the course of a survey or a search, [or where any record or property is produced by any person or has been resumed or seized from the custody or control of any person or has been frozen under this Act or under any other law for the time being in force, it shall be presumed that (i) such records or property belong or belongs to such person....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....earned counsel for the petitioner doesn't hold water. Further the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pavna Dibbur v. Directorate of Enforcement (Criminal Appeal No. 2779/2023) held that the who could commit an offence under the PMLA maybe not be named in the scheduled offence. 90. Further the offence of money laundering as contemplated in Section 3 of the PMLA has been elaborately dealt with by the three Judge Bench in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra), in which it has been observed that Section 3 has a wider reach. The offence as defined captures every process and activity in dealing with the proceeds of crime, directly or indirectly, and is not limited to the happening of the final act of integration of tainted property in the formal economy to constitute an act of money laundering. Of course, the authority of the Authorised Officer under the Act to prosecute any person for the offence of money laundering gets triggered only if there exist proceeds of crime within the meaning of Section 2(1)(u) of the Act and further it is involved in any process or activity. Not even in case of existence of undisclosed income and irrespective of its volume, the definition of "Proceeds of Crime" under Section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in reading of Section 3 of the Act, 2002, an offence under Section 3 can be said to be committed after a scheduled offence is committed. By giving an example, it has been clarified that if a person who is unconnected with the scheduled offence, knowingly assists the concealment of the proceeds of crime or knowingly assists the use of proceeds of crime, in that case, he can be held guilty of committing an offence under Section 3 of the PMLA. Therefore, it is not necessary that a person against whom the offence under Section 3 of the PMLA is alleged must have been shown as the accused in the scheduled offence. 95. So far as the facts of the present case are concerned, the respondent ED has placed heavy reliance on the statements of witnesses and the documents produced by them under Section 50 of the said Act, to prima facie show the involvement of petitioner in the alleged offence of money laundering under Section 3 thereof. 96. The three Judge Bench the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rohit Tandon vs. Directorate of Enforcement (supra) held that the statements of witnesses recorded by Prosecution - ED are admissible in evidence in view of Section 50. Such statements may make out....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eafter; all these will be of no consequence. 97. In a recent judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Abhishek Banerjee & Anr. v. Enforcement Directorate, (2024) 9 SCC 22 has again made similar observations: "21. ...Section 160 which falls under Ch. XII empowers the police officer making an investigation under the said chapter to require any person to attend within the limits of his own or adjoining station who, from the information given or otherwise appears to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case, whereas, the process envisaged by Section 50 PMLA is in the nature of an inquiry against the proceeds of crime and is not "investigation" in strict sense of the term for initiating prosecution; and the authorities referred to in Section 48 PMLA are not the police officers as held in Vijay Madanlal [Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, (2023) 12 SCC 1]. 22. It has been specifically laid down in the said decision that the statements recorded by the authorities under Section 50 PMLA are not hit by Article 20(3) or Article 21 of the Constitution, rather such statements recorded by the authority in the course of inquiry are deemed to be the judicial proceeding....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the petitioner knowingly is as the party and is actually involved in all the activities connected with the offence of money laundering. i.e., use or acquisition, possession, concealment, and projecting or claiming as untainted property. 103. Having examined the admissibility of statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA, this Court shall now proceed to analyze the statutory framework governing the burden of proof under Section 24 in proceedings related to proceeds of crime. "24. Burden of proof. --In any proceeding relating to proceeds of crime under this Act, -- (a) in the case of a person charged with the offence of money-laundering under section 3, the Authority or Court shall, unless the contrary is proved, presume that such proceeds of crime are involved in money-laundering; and (b) in the case of any other person the Authority or Court, may presume that such proceeds of crime are involved in money-laundering." 104. From the bare perusal of Section 24 of the PMLA, it is evident that once a person is charged with the offence of money laundering under Section 3 of the PMLA, the law presumes that the proceeds of crime are involved in money laundering unless the cont....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rime are involved in money-laundering. The fact that the person concerned had no causal connection with such proceeds of crime and he is able to disprove the fact about his involvement in any process or activity connected therewith, by producing evidence in that regard, the legal presumption would stand rebutted. 108. Be it noted that the legal presumption under Section 24(a) of the Act 2002, would apply when the person is charged with the offence of money-laundering and his direct or indirect involvement in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime, is established. The existence of proceeds of crime is, therefore, a foundational fact, to be established by the prosecution, including the involvement of the person in any process or activity connected therewith. Once these foundational facts are established by the prosecution, the onus must then shift on the person facing charge of offence of money-laundering to rebut the legal presumption that the proceeds of crime are not involved in money-laundering, by producing evidence which is within his personal knowledge of the accused. 109. In other words, the expression "presume" is not conclusive. It also does not foll....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the prosecution must satisfy three essential ingredients. First, the commission of a scheduled offence must be established. Second, the property in question must be shown to have been derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of such criminal activity and third, the accused must be linked, directly or indirectly, to any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime. 114. Thus, from the entire discussion it is evident that the petitioner is an influential person being Cabinet Minister in the State of Jharkhand and the evidence collected during investigation by the agency broadly speaks that the co-accused Veerandra Kumar Ram used to collect commission in terms of allocation of tender and execution of work and the said commission/fixed share of 1.35% was distributed among his seniors and politicians and the said commission is also collected by co-accused Sanjeev Kumar Lal, P.S. of the present petitioner through certain persons. It has also been submitted that during the investigation, it has been ascertained that the entire collection and distribution of commission was taken care of by the assistant engineers posted at the Rural Development Special Division....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....king into consideration the provision of Sections 19(1), 45(1) and 45(2) of PML Act that the conditions provided therein are required to be considered while granting the benefit of regular bail in exercise of power conferred under statute apart from the twin conditions which has been provided under Section 45(1) of the Act, 2002. 120. Thus, Section 45 of the PMLA turns the principle of bail is the rule and jail is the exception on its head. The power of the Court to grant bail is further conditioned upon the satisfaction of the twin conditions prescribed under Section 45(1) (i) and (ii) PMLA. While undertaking this exercise, the Court is required to take a prima facie view on the basis of materials collected during investigation. The expression used in Section 45 of PMLA are "reasonable grounds for believing" which means that the Court has to find, from a prima facie view of the materials collected during investigation that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has not committed the offence and that there is no likelihood of him committing an offence while on bail. Recently, in Tarun Kumar v Assistant Directorate of Enforcement, (supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Schedule to the PML Act. Any property thus derived as a result of criminal activity relating to offence mentioned in said Para 8 of Part-A of the Schedule would certainly be "proceeds of crime". 14. The said Section 3 states, inter alia, that whoever knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering (emphasis added by us)." 123. Further, at the stage of recording statements during enquiry, it cannot be construed as an investigation for prosecution. The process envisaged under Section 50 of PMLA is in the nature of an inquiry against the proceeds of crime and it is not an investigation and the authorities who are recording the statements are not police officers and therefore, these statements can be relied upon as admissible piece of evidence before the Court. The summons proceedings and recording of statements under PMLA are given the status of judicial proceedings under Section 50(4) of PMLA. When such is the sweep of Section 50 of PMLA, the statements that have been recorded by the responden....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ge, we find that he has been swayed by the factum that when a charge-sheet is filed it amounts to change of circumstance. Needless to say, filing of the charge-sheet does not in any manner lessen the allegations made by the prosecution. On the contrary, filing of the charge-sheet establishes that after due investigation the investigating agency, having found materials, has placed the charge-sheet for trial of the accused persons." 131. Thus, this Court, after taking note of the settled legal proposition, is of view that the aforesaid contention is not tenable in the eye of law. On the issue of Parity: 132. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised the ground of parity with respect to co-accused person, namely, Veerendra Kumar Ram who has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 18.11.2024 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 4615 of 2024. Likewise, accused Harish Yadav was already granted bail vide order dated 30.08.2024 in Special Leave petition (Crl.) No. 6174 of 2024. Further, accused Tara Chand has also been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 25.11.2024 in Cr. Appeal No. 4760 of 2024. Furthermore, other accused persons, namely, Rajk....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....igh Court has failed to take note of the same. Therefore, the order has to pave the path of extinction, for its approval by this Court would tantamount to travesty of justice, and accordingly we set it aside. 26. Another aspect of the case which needs emphasis is the manner in which the High Court has applied the principle of parity. By its two orders both dated 21-12-2020 [Pravinbhai Hirabhai Koli v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 2986], [Khetabhai Parbatbhai Makwana v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 2988], the High Court granted bail to Pravin Koli (A- 10) and Kheta Parbat Koli (A-15). Parity was sought with Sidhdhrajsinh Bhagubha Vaghela (A-13) to whom bail was granted on 22-10-2020 [Siddhrajsinh Bhagubha Vaghela v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 2985] on the ground (as the High Court recorded) that he was "assigned similar role of armed with stick (sic)". Again, bail was granted to Vanraj Koli (A-16) on the ground that he was armed with a wooden stick and on the ground that Pravin (A-10), Kheta (A-15) and Sidhdhrajsinh (A-13) who were armed with sticks had been granted bail. The High Court has evidently misunderstood the central aspect of what is meant by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r compelled the Chief Engineer under his portfolio to collect commission and give him his share through his Personal Secretary Sanjeev Kumar Lal. 139. It has been alleged against the petitioner in the counter affidavit that he is the key person who is at the top of the hierarchy and receives commission collected from the subordinates and also controls the whole syndicate of collection of commission. It has come on record that the petitioner has misused his official position and acquired proceeds of crime by collecting bribes as a commission/bribe from the contractors in lieu of allotments of tenders with the help of his the then PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal. 140. Further, there is substantial documentary evidence that reveals the role of the petitioner in detail as already discussed in Supplementary Prosecution Complaints as above. 141. Applying the principle of parity, this Court is of the view as per the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in Tarun Kumar (Supra) that the benefit of parity is to be given if the facts/involvement of the petitioner is identical to the persons with whom parity is being claimed but that is not the case herein. 142. This Court, on the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Court that the nature and gravity of the alleged offence should have been kept in mind because corruption poses a serious threat to our society should be dealt with by iron hand. 147. Further, it is required to refer herein that the Money Laundering is an economic offence and economic offences comes under the of grave offences hence needs to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail as held by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Y. S Jagan Mohan Reddy v/s C. B. I., reported in (2013) 7 SCC 439. For ready reference, the relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid judgments are being quoted as under: "34. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country." 148. Similarly, the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Nimgadda Prasad Vs. C.B.I., reported in (2013) 7 SCC 466 has reiterated the same view in paragraphs-23 to 25 which reads as un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds needs to be viewed seriously and considered as a grave offence affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country." 149. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation Vs Santosh Karnani and Another, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 427 has observed that corruption poses a serious threat to our society and must be dealt with iron hands. The relevant paragraph of the aforesaid judgment is being referred as under:- "31. The nature and gravity of the alleged offence should have been kept in mind by the High Court. Corruption poses a serious threat to our society and must be dealt with iron hands. It not only leads to abysmal loss to the public exchequer but also tramples good governance. The common man stands deprived of the benefits percolating under social welfare schemes and is the worst hit. It is aptly said, "Corruption is a tree whose branches are of an unmeasurable length; they spread everywhere; and the dew that drops from thence, Hath infected some chairs and stools of authority." Hence, the need to be extra conscious." 150....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the community. A disregard for the interest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the community in the system to administer justice in an even-handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the National Economy and National Interest..." 23. With the advancement of technology and Artificial Intelligence, the economic offences like money laundering have become a real threat to the functioning of the financial system of the country and have become a great challenge for the investigating agencies to detect and comprehend the intricate nature of transactions, as also the role of the persons involved therein. Lot of minute exercise is expected to be undertaken by the Investigating Agency to see that no innocent person is wrongly booked and that no culprit escapes from the clutches of the law. When the detention of the accused is continued by the Court, the courts are also expected to conclude the trials within a reasonable time, further ens....