TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 933
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 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 commiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-05-2024, 08-05-2024, 09-05-2024, 10-05-2024 and 24-05-2024 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 t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t and has falsely been implicated in this case with oblique motive and mala fide intention 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-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....leged that the petitioner pressurized the Chief Engineer to collect commission and gave him his share of 1.35% through his PS, Sanjeev Kumar Lal. But no case has been instituted of demanding 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 A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en into custody on 15.05.2024 and since then he is languishing in judicial custody. XIX. The submission has been made that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case on the basis of statement recorded under Section 50 of the PML 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., (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....petitioner is to be given the benefit of privilege of bail. Argument advanced by learned counsel for the opposite party-Enforcement Directorate: 20. While on the other hand, Mr. Zohab Hossain, assisted by Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the opposite party-Enforcement Directorate has seriously 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.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e PML Act, hence the petitioner is deeply involved in commission of crime. VI. It has been submitted that the proceeds of crime have been defined under Section 2(u) of PML Act, 2002 which 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. 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rned. While on the other hand Section 45 of the PML Act confers power upon the court to consider the issue of bail of the said person and on being satisfied that no prima facie case is being made out then only the prayer for bail is to be considered on the ground that there is sufficient ground for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit any 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was enacted to address the urgent need to have a comprehensive legislation inter alia for preventing money-laundering, attachment of proceeds of crime, adjudication and confiscation thereof including vesting of it in the Central Government, setting up of agencies and mechanisms for coordinating measures for combating money-laundering and also to prosecute the persons indulging in the process or activity connected with the 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 t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d (v) promoting international co-operation in investigation of money-laundering. (d) the Political Declaration and Global Programme of Action adopted by United Nations General Assembly by its Resolution No. S-17/2 of 23rd February, 1990, inter alia, calls upon the member States to develop mechanism to prevent financial institutions from being used for laundering of drug related money and enactment of legislation to prevent such laundering. (e) the United Nations in the Special Session on countering 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmovable, tangible or intangible and includes deeds and instruments evidencing title to, or interest in, such property or assets, wherever located. 32. The schedule has been defined under Section 2(1)(x) which means schedule to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The "scheduled offence" has been defined under Section 2(1)(y) which reads as under: "2 (1)(y) "scheduled offence" means- (i) the offences specified under Part A of the Schedule; or (ii) the offences specified under Part B of the Schedule if the total value involved in such 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roduction of documents and to give evidence, etc.-(1) The Director shall, for the purposes of section 13, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) while trying a suit in respect of the following matters, namely:- (a) discovery and inspection; (b) enforcing the attendance of any person, including any officer of a [reporting entity] and examining him on oath; (c) compelling the production of records; (d) receiving evidence on affidavits; (e) issuing commissions for examination of witnesses and documents; and (f) any other matter which may be prescribed. (2) The 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 st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate of Jharkhand, enunciated that the international treaties, covenants and conventions although may not be a part of municipal law, the same be referred to and followed by the Courts having regard to the fact that India is a party to the said treaties. This Court went on to observe that the Constitution of India and other ongoing statutes have been read consistently with the rules of international law. It is also observed that the Constitution of India and the enactments made by Parliament must necessarily be understood in the context of the present-day scenario and having regard to the international treaties and convention as our constitution takes note of the institutions of the world community which had been created. 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 Indi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ose of collecting information or evidence in respect of proceeding under this Act. Indeed, the person so summoned, is bound to attend in person or through authorised agent and to state truth upon any subject concerning which he is being examined or is expected to make statement and produce documents as may be required by virtue of sub-section (3) of Section 50 of the 2002 Act. The criticism is essentially because of subsection (4) which provides that every proceeding under sub-sections (2) and (3) shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of Sections 193 and 228 of the IPC. Even so, the fact remains that Article 20(3) or for that matter Section 25 of the Evidence Act, would come into play only when the person so summoned is an accused 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 a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....testimonial compulsion in the court room but may well extend to compelled testimony previously obtained from him. It is available therefore to a person against whom a formal accusation relating to the commission of an offence has been levelled which in the normal course may result in prosecution. Whether it is available to other persons in other situations does not call for decision in this case." (emphasis supplied) 338. In the context of the 2002 Act, it must be remembered that the summon is issued by the Authority under Section 50 in connection with the inquiry regarding proceeds of crime which may have been attached and pending adjudication before the Adjudicating Authority. In respect of such action, the designated officials have been empowered to summon 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Central Government." 41. It is evident from the observation so made as above that the purposes and objects of the 2002 Act for which it has been enacted, is not limited to punishment for offence of money-laundering, but also to provide measures for prevention of money-laundering. It is also to provide for attachment of proceeds of crime, which are likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which may result in frustrating any proceeding relating to confiscation of such proceeds under the 2002 Act. This Act is also to compel the banking companies, financial institutions and intermediaries to maintain records of the transactions, to furnish information of such transactions within the prescribed time in terms of Chapter IV of the 2002 Act. 42. The predicate offence 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 of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....titutional validity of Sub-section (1) of Section 45, as it stood then, was considered in Nikesh Tarachand Shah. This Court declared Section 45(1) of the 2002 Act, as it stood then, insofar as it imposed two further conditions for release on bail, to be unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The two conditions which have been mentioned as twin conditions are: (i) that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence; and (ii) that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. 269. According to the petitioners, since the twin conditions have been declared to be void and unconstitutional by this Court, the same stood obliterated. To buttress this argument, reliance has been placed on the dictum in State of Manipur. 270. The first 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 u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is needless to say that as per the statutory presumption permitted under Section 24 of the Act, the Court or the Authority is entitled to presume unless the contrary is proved, that in any proceedings relating to proceeds of crime under the Act, in the case of a person charged with the offence of money laundering under Section 3, such proceeds of crime are involved in money laundering. Such conditions enumerated in Section 45 of PML Act will have to be complied with even in respect of an application for bail made under Section 439 Cr. P.C. in view of the overriding effect given to the PML Act over the other law for the time being in force, under Section 71 of the PML Act." 49. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the said judgment has further laid down that the twin conditions as to fulfil the requirement of Section 45 of the Act, 2002 before granting the benefit 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 A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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. For ready reference, paragraph-30 of the said judgment reads as under: "30. The conditions specified under Section 45 of PMLA are mandatory and need to be complied with, which is further strengthened by the provisions of Section 65 and also Section 71 of PMLA. Section 65 requires that the provisions of CrPC shall apply insofar as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act and Section 71 provides that the provisions 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 i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 50 of PMLA, 2002. 7.2 Veerendra Kumar Ram in his statement further stated that the whole process of collection and distribution of commission was taken care of by the assistant engineers posted at the Rural Development Special Zone and Rural Works Department. He further stated that the share of Minister Alamgir Alam was 1.5% of the allocated tender amount. Investigation revealed that Rs. 3 crores were given to Alamgir Alam by engineers of the Rural Works Department through his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal in September 2022. 7.3 Further, it was ascertained that the amount of commission on behalf of Alamgir Alam was getting collected by Sanjeev Kumar Lal (his PS). Further, it was ascertained that a person named Jahangir Alam collects such commission on the instructions of Sanjeev Kumar Lal who is an associate of Sanjeev Kumar Lal. During investigation, it was found that Sanjeev Kumar Lal resides 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d seized. 7.7 Apart from the above, as a result of the search other cash amounts that were recovered and seized on different dates from the other premises. ........ In this way, Cash totalling to Rs. 37.55 Crores Approx. has been recovered and seized from the various premises searched u/s 17 of the PMLA,2002 on 06th, 07th and 08th of May 2024. 7.8 Apart from the above cash amounts several digital devices, incriminating documents and records were found and seized from the aforesaid premises during the course of searches on 06.05.2024, 07.05.2024, 08.05.2024, 10.05.2024 & 24.05.2024 under section 17 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. " 57. This Court has also gone through the averments made in the prosecution complaint regarding modus operandi of generation of 'proceeds of crime', wherein it has been stated that total of 18 searches were conducted u/s 17 of PMLA in Ranchi, at the premises of Sanjeev Kumar Lal, Jahangir 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s brother (Santosh Kumar) to collect cash from the said engineers. Sanjeev Kumar Lal further instructed Jahangir Alam to stand near Abhinandan Marriage hall, near Rani Hospital and Deendayal Nagar, Ranchi with his Aprilia scooter bearing Registration No. JH01ES8402, 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. Thus, it is ascertained that Sanjeev Kumar Lal takes care of the collection of commission on behalf of Minister Alamgir Alam. 8.3 Statements 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 under: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rly establishes that Sanjeev Kumar Lal was using the said premise of Jahangir Alam as a safe house for keeping cash, documents/records and other belongings related to Minister Alamgir Alam and himself...... 8.16.That, several documents and records pertaining to Sanjeev Kumar Lal were seized from the said premise of Jahangir Alam including several torn pages of a few diaries and notes. When these torn pages of diaries were confronted with Sanjeev Kumar Lal, he in his statements recorded u/s 50 of PMLA, 2002 has inter alia stated that these torn pages and notes contain the calculations (Hisab Kitab) of cash/commission collected against the allocation of tenders of RWD, JSRRDA and RDSD. " 58. In order to prove the allegation, statements of several persons were recorded under the provisions of PMLA, the gist of the statements is quoted as under: "10. BRIEF DETAILS OF PERSONS EXAMINED UNDER SECTION 17 AND 50 OF PMLA, 2002. During the course of the search and investigation, statements of several persons were recorded under the provisions of PMLA, the gist of the statements relevant to this investigation is as under: 10.1. Veerendra Kumar Ram: Veeren....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd other engineers to collect the commission and give him the share of Minister Alamgir Alam. He instructed Santosh Kumar, brother of Munna Singh to collect commission/cash from Chief Engineers and other engineers and hand over the same to Jahangir Alam. He further instructed Jahangir Alam to collect cash/commission from Santosh Kumar, brother of Munna Singh and store the same at his (Jahangir Alam's) premises safely. He further accepted that the cash amount recovered and seized from the premises of Munna Singh and Rajeev Kumar Singh during the search is also the commission amount of Alamgir Alam which was yet to be handed over to Jahangir Alam. He maintained the calculations (Hisab Kitab) of the collected commission of Alamgir Alam in torn pages of diaries. He has also taken his share of around Rs. 2.05 Crore from the commission and invested the same in immovable and movable properties in his name and in the name of his family members. Further, Sanjeev Kumar Lal stated u/s 50 of PMLA that Munna Singh and his brother were not aware that the money they were collected, was the commission amount against the tenders. They did the same on his instructions. 10.4. Ja....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure income, but she failed to produce any documents regarding her aforesaid loans and agriculture income. 10.6. Munna Singh: Statements of Munna Singh were recorded u/s 50 of PMLA wherein he inter alia stated that the huge cash amount seized from his premises i.e. Rs. 2.93 Crore is the commission amount which was yet to be handed over to the person of Sanjeev Kumar Lal. He further stated that Rs. 50 Crore were collected from assistant engineers, and he sent it to Sanjeev Kumar Lal during the period of 8 to 9 months. When asked about regarding Rs. 50 Crore already sent to Sanjeev Kumar Lal but only Rs. 32.20 Crore have been recovered and seized from the premised of Jahangir Alam he stated that only Sanjeev Kumar Lal can explain the same. Further, a diary was recovered and seized from the premises of Munna Singh which contains the details of commission amount of around Rs. 50 Crore collected from the Chief and other engineers of RWD, JSRRDA and RDSD. Further, Munna Singh has stated in his statement recorded on u/s 50 of PMLA, that he has not received any share from the commission he used to collect. He did the collection and handing over of the cash only following the instru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder: (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 Engineer Promod Kumar, he has collected around Rs. 6.36 Crore against the total tender amount of Rs. 212 Crores. Out of which 2.86 Crores i.e. share of Alamgir Alam has been handed over to Sanjeev Kumar Lal. 10.10. Ajay Kumar: Statement of Ajay Kumar, Executive 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. 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 Engineer Pramod Kumar he has collected around Rs. 4.77 Crore against total ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount 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. 18 Crore through Assistant Engineers against a total tender amount of Rs. 600 Crores. Out of which 12 Crores i.e. share of Alamgir Alam has been handed over to Sanjeev Kumar Lal. He further stated that Sanjeev Kumar Lal told him that the excess commission amount would be adjusted in future. He further stated that during one of his visits to Project Bhavan in April 2023 Minister Alamgir Alam had asked him about his share in commission against the allotment of tenders and Alamgir Alam also told him that his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal would handle the collection of commission on his behalf and also told him to follow the directions of Sanjeev Kumar Lal in this regard. 10.14. Surendra Kumar: Statement of Surendra Kumar, Chief-Engineer, RDSD 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 contr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions to Assistant Engineers through Santosh Kumar, Executive Engineer and/or other executive engineers to collect commission amount, and this system had been continuously followed. He further stated that he had collected Ra. 9 Crores through his subordinate engineers, and same was further handed over to Sanjeev Kumar Lal. 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 10.17. Ramesh Ojha: Statement of Ramesh Ojha, Retired Assistant Engineer, RWD and RDSZ was recorded u/s 50 of PMLA wherein he inter alia stated that Veerendra Kumar Ram instructed and pressurized him to receive a commission in lie of allotment of tenders. 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 the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aundering. 1. Alamgir Alam [Accused No. 11]- a) Alamgir Alam is Minister of (i) Department of Rural Works (RWD), (ii) Department of Panchayati Raj and (iii) Department of Rural Development (RDD). Jharkhand State Rural Road Development Authority (JSRRDA) and Rural Development Special Division (RDSD) are the part of the Department of Rural Works (RWD). RWD, JSRRDA and RDSD constructs the roads and bridges in the state of Jharkhand, for which tenders are floated by these departments, against which 3% commission has been collected. He being the minister of these departments, is all in all and at the top echelon in the syndicate of commission collection. b) He has pressurised and compelled the Chief Engineer under his portfolio to collect commission and give him his share through his PS Sanjeev Kumar Lal. c) He has instructed Sanjeev Kumar Lal to collect his 1.35% share in total commission which is 3% of total tender value(Discussed in detail in Para 8.2 88.3). d) Accordingly, Sanjeev Kumar Lal has instructed departmental engineers to hand over the commission part of Alamgir Alam to Munna Singh and/or his brother Santosh Kumar alias Rinku Sin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....res, for purchasing immovable properties in the name of himself, his wife and his close aid Jahangir Alam. Hence, Sanjeev Kumar Lal is directly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment, possession, utilisation and acquisition. g) Sanjeev Kumar Lal is the mastermind and has played vital role in this syndicate/organized structure of illegal collection of proceeds of crime. h) He is found to be directly indulged and actually involved and knowingly assisted Alamgir Alam in acquisition, possession and concealment of the Proceeds of Crime at least to the tune of Rs. 56 crores. i) He is also found to be directly indulged and actually involved in the acquisition and concealment of PoC at least to the tune of Rs. 2.05 crores and claimed the proceeds of crime as untainted. j) He has also found to be directly indulged and actually involved in using Proceeds of crime in at least 4 (four) immovable properties which he acquired in his own name, in name of his wife and his close aide Jahangir Alam and same four properties have been attached u/s 5(1) of the PMLA, 2002 and also being prayed for confiscation. 3. Jahangir Alam (Accused No.-13) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry of petitioner Alamgir Alam) and a person named Jahangir Alam who is an associate of Sanjeev Kumar Lal collected such commission on the instructions of Sanjeev Kumar Lal. 62. It has further come on record that 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'. It is evident from the aforesaid complaint that huge cash to the tune of Rs 32.20 crores was recovered and seized on 06/07.05.2024 from the premises of Jahangir Alam i.e. Flat No. 1A, Sir Syed Residency, Kumhartoli, Ranchi. 63. It has further come on record that a total of 18 searches were conducted u/s 17 of Act 2002, in Ranchi, at the premises of Sanjeev Kumar Lal, Jahangir Alam, some Engineers and other persons on different dates. As a result of the 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. 64. Sanjeev Kumar Lal during his ED Custody interrogation also stated that the commission in the ran....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... mentioned in the prosecution complaint dated 04.07.2024. 69. At this juncture it needs to refer herein that it is settled connotation of law that at the stage of considering bail, the duty of the Court is not to weigh the evidence meticulously but to arrive at a finding on the basis of broad probabilities and Court should not venture into the merit of the case by analyzing that whether conviction is possible or not. Meaning thereby at this stage the Court has to see the prima facie case only. 70. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rohit Tandon v. Directorate of Enforcement (supra) while referring the ratio of Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (2005) 5 SCC 294 has categorically held that the Court ought to maintain a delicate balance between a judgment of acquittal and conviction and an order granting bail much before commencement of trial. The duty of the Court at this stage is not to weigh the evidence meticulously but to arrive at a finding on the basis of broad probabilities. 71. Further the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors(supra) has reiterated the same view and has observe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ney laundering cannot be negated. 74. So far, the issue of non-availability of money trail as raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is concerned it has come on the record that a huge cash of Rs.32.20 crore was recovered and seized from the premises of Jahangir Alam an associate of Sanjeev Kumar Lal who was personal Secretary to the Minister i.e. the applicant herein. It is also pertinent to note that several incriminating notes and pages of diaries were also found during search and seizure which was maintained by Sanjeev Kumar Lal recording the share of the minister Alamgir Alam from the total commission collected from the tenders. By way of Section 50 statement Sanjeev Kumar Lal, the personal Secretary to the Minister/applicant, has admitted the contents of these seized pages and the fact that he was collecting commission on behalf of the applicant/minister as recorded in the 'Hisab-Kitab' seized by ED corroborates the factum of recovery. He further decoded the code words and clearly mentioned that the applicant/minister was the beneficiary of commission amount. 75. Thus, this Court is of prima facie view that the contention of the petitioner that the prosecution ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for the prosecution to establish the money trail. 78. Further, in view of above, prima facie it appears that there is direct complicity of the petitioner in collecting money through his private secretary, Sanjeev Kumar Lal which has come in evidence in the statement recorded under Section 50 of the PML Act and the diary making reference of the said fact showing the complicity of the present petitioner in collecting commission in lieu of tender. Therefore, in view of Section 3 of the PML Act particularly its explanation part, the aforesaid argument is having no substance. 79. So far, the contention as raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the 'reason to believe' has not been furnished to the petitioner is concerned, it has been argued that the judgment in the case of Arvind Kejriwal was pronounced on 12.07.2024 while the present petitioner has been taken into custody on 15.05.2024 hence whatever has been laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Arvind Kejriwal will have no retrospective application. 80. The learned counsel for ED in order to buttress his argument has relied upon the judgment rendered by Delhi High Court in the case of Arvind Dham vs. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....02 it is evident that if any books of account, documents, money, bullion, jewellery, or other valuable article or thing are found in possession or control of any person during a search under this Act, then it may be presumed that such items belong to such person and the contents of the books or documents are true, and the signature and handwriting in such documents are of the person to whom they are attributed. 85. Hence, it appears that the petitioner is directly indulged 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, as defined u/s 3 of PMLA, 2002. 86. Further, the role of the petitioner in the laundering of proceeds of crime generated out of the commission of scheduled offence has been discussed in detail in the prosecution complaint and supplementary prosecution complaint as well as the paragraphs abovementioned. 87. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is not the named accused in the first FIR and as such his culpability in alleged crime cannot be fully established. 88. In this context i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pavana Dibbur vs. The Directorate of Enforcement passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2779 of 2023 has considered the effect of the appellant not being shown as an accused in the predicate offence by taking into consideration Section 3 of the Act, 2002. The Hon'ble Apex Court by interpreting the provision of Section 3 of the Act, 2002 has come out with the finding that on a plain reading of Section 3, unless proceeds of crime exist, there cannot be any money laundering offence. 92. Based upon the definition Clause (u) of sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Act 2002 which defines "proceeds of crime", the Hon'ble Apex Court at paragraph-12 has been pleased to observe that clause (v) of sub-section (1) of Section 2 of PMLA defines "property" to mean any property or assets of every description, whether corporeal or incorporeal, movable or immovable, tangible or intangible. 93. To constitute any property as proceeds of crime, it must be derived or obtained directly or indirectly by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. The explanation clarifies that the proceeds of crime include property, not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed upon by the prosecution and also noted the inexplicable silence or reluctance of the appellant in disclosing the source from where such huge value of demonetised currency and also new currency has been acquired by him. The prosecution is relying on statements of 26 witnesses/accused already recorded, out of which 7 were considered by the Delhi High Court. These statements are admissible in evidence, in view of Section 50 of the 2002 Act. The same makes out a formidable case about the involvement of the appellant in commission of a serious offence of money laundering. It is, therefore, not possible for us to record satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the appellant is not guilty of such offence. Further, the courts below have justly adverted to the antecedents of the appellant for considering the prayer for bail and concluded that it is not possible to hold that the appellant is not likely to commit any offence ascribable to the 2002 Act while on bail. Since the threshold stipulation predicated in Section 45 has not been overcome, the question of considering the efficacy of other points urged by the appellant to persuade the Court to favour the appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of the foregoing judicial pronouncements, it is evident that statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA hold evidentiary value and are admissible in legal proceedings. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, while emphasizing the legal sanctity of such statements, observed that they constitute valid material upon which reliance can be placed to sustain allegations under the PMLA. 99. In the aforesaid judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court also reaffirmed the admissibility of Section 50 of the PMLA distinguishing them from statements recorded under the CrPC. The Court underscored that such statements, being recorded during an inquiry rather than an investigation, are not subject to the restrictions under Article 20(3) and Article 21 of the Constitution. Instead, they are deemed to be judicial proceedings under Section 50(4) of the PMLA and, therefore, admissible as evidence in proceedings under the PMLA. The Hon'ble Apex Court further clarified that the provisions of Section 50 of the PMLA having an overriding effect by virtue of Sections 65 and 71 of the PMLA prevail over the procedural safeguards under the CrPC. 100. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that statements ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... demonstrate that the proceeds of crime attributed to him are not linked to money laundering. In the absence of any rebuttal by the applicant, the presumption under Section 24 of the PMLA stands in favor of the respondent, thereby, justifying his continued detention. 107. With regard to the above, this Court has referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prem Prakash v. Union of India through Directorate of Enforcement, (2024) 9 SCC 787, wherein, the following observations were made: "18. In Vijay Madanlal Choudhary [Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, (2023) 12 SCC 1] dealing with Section 24 PMLA, the three-Judge Bench held as under : (SCC pp. 229-31, paras 237 & 239-40) "237. Be that as it may, we may now proceed to decipher the purport of Section 24 of the 2002 Act. In the first place, it must be noticed that the legal presumption in either case is about the involvement of proceeds of crime in money-laundering. This fact becomes relevant, only if, the prosecution or the authorities have succeeded in establishing at least three basic or foundational facts. First, that the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence has been committ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aw, including by replying under Section 313 of the 1973 Code or even by cross-examining prosecution witnesses. The person would get enough opportunity in the proceeding before the authority or the court, as the case may be. He may be able to discharge his burden by showing that he is not involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime. 111. In the case of Collector of Customs & Ors. v. D. Bhoormall (1974) 2 SCC 544 proceedings were initiated under Section 167(8)(c) of the Customs Act for confiscation of contraband or smuggled goods and it was observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court that on the principle underlying Section 106, Evidence Act, the burden to establish those facts is cast on the person concerned; and, if he fails to establish or explain those facts, an adverse inference of facts may arise against him. The relevant paragraph of the aforesaid Judgment is being quoted as under: "Since it is exceedingly difficult, if not absolutely impossible, for the prosecution to prove facts which are especially within the knowledge of the opponent or the accused, it is not obliged to prove them as part of its primary burden. ... On the principle ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t made under Section 50 of PMLA, 2002 and in one of the instances Veerendra Kumar Ram disclosed that crores of the commission were handed over to the co-accused Sanjeev Kumar Lal, Personal Secretary of the present petitioner, in September 2022. It has also come that co-accused Jahangir Alam was assisting Sanjeev Kumar Lal and was hoarding the said commission on the instruction of Sanjeev Kumar Lal and the said Sanjeev Kumar Lal takes care of the collection of commission, and Jahangir Alam collected the same at the instruction of Sanjeev Kumar Lal, who in turn was doing so on behalf of the present petitioner. 116. Now in the light of aforesaid discussion at this juncture this Court thinks it fit to revisit the scope of Section 45 of the PML Act 2002. As discussed in preceding paragraphs that Section 45 of the PMLA Act, 2002 provides twin test. First 'reason to believe' is to be there for the purpose of reaching to the conclusion that there is no prima facie case and second condition is that the accused is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. 117. Sub-section (1)(ii) of Section 45 of the Act, 2002, provides that if the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tted under Section 24 of the Act, the Court or the Authority is entitled to presume unless the contrary is proved, that in any proceedings relating to proceeds of crime under the Act, in the case of a person charged with the offence of money laundering under Section 3, such proceeds of crime are involved in money laundering. Such conditions enumerated in Section 45 of PML Act will have to be complied with even in respect of an application for bail made under Section 439 Cr. P.C. in view of the overriding effect given to the PML Act over the other law for the time being in force, under Section 71 of the PML Act." 121. This Court, based upon the imputation as has been discovered in course of investigation, is of the view that what has been argued on behalf of the petitioner that proceeds cannot be said to be proceeds of crime is not fit to be acceptable because as would appear from the preceding paragraphs, money which has been alleged to be obtained by the petitioner/accused has been routed through his Private Secretary, Sanjeev Kumar Lal. 122. If there is a prima facie material to show that the amount has been received by misusing the position of the petitioner that by itself....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... recorded from the witnesses during the investigation have been dealt with in prosecution complaint and many of the statements clearly implicate the petitioner. Therefore, the statements that have been recorded from the witnesses and which has been relied upon, is also a strong material that prima facie establishes the offence of money laundering against the present petitioner. 125. Thus, on the basis of the discussion made hereinabove, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that even if the entire ECIR will be taken into consideration, no offence will be said to be committed so as to attract the ingredients of Sections 3 & 4 of the P.M.L. Act, 2002, is totally misplaced in the light of accusation as mentioned in prosecution complaint. 126. Further, contention has been raised that a prosecution complaint against the petitioner has already been filed and, thus, investigation is complete and therefore, no purpose would be served in keeping the petitioner in judicial custody. 127. In the aforesaid context, it is settled position of law that the mere fact that investigation is complete does not necessarily confer a right on the accused/petitioner to be releas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lar then only the principle of parity in the matter of passing order is to be passed but if there is difference in between the facts then the principle of parity is not to be applied. 134. It is further settled connotation of law that Court cannot exercise its powers in a capricious manner and has to consider the totality of circumstances before granting bail and by only simple saying that another accused has been granted bail is not sufficient to determine whether a case for grant of bail on the basis of parity has been established. Reference in this regard may be made to the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Ramesh Bhavan Rathod vs. Vishanbhai Hirabhai Makwana & Anr., (2021) 6 SCC 230, wherein, it has been held as under: "25. We are constrained to observe that the orders passed by the High Court granting bail fail to pass muster under the law. They are oblivious to, and innocent of, the nature and gravity of the alleged offences and to the severity of the punishment in the event of conviction. In Neeru Yadav v. State of U.P. [Neeru Yadav v. State of U.P., (2014) 16 SCC 508:], this Court has held that while applying the principle of parity, the High Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... attached to the accused, their position in relation to the incident and to the victims is of utmost importance. The High Court has proceeded on the basis of parity on a simplistic assessment as noted above, which again cannot pass muster under the law." 135. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Tarun Kumar Vs. Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement (supra) wherein at paragraph-18, it has been held that parity is not the law and while applying the principle of parity, the Court is required to focus upon the role attached to the accused whose application is under consideration. 136. Now, this Court is adverting to the facts of instant case to decide the issue of parity in the backdrop of aforesaid settled legal ratio and as such thinks it fit to discuss herein distinguishable facts in the case of present petitioner to that of the case of co-accused persons who have been granted bail. 137. This Court, in order to verify the issue of principle of parity, has gone through the order by which, co-accused have been enlarged on the bail and found that there is allegation upon the said co-accused persons that they have worked as a pawn in their individual capacity in the alleged commis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....applying the principle of parity. 143. It is pertinent to mention here that the Hon'ble Apex Court in P. Chidambaram v. Central Bureau Investigation reported in 2020 13 SCC 337 has come up with triple test under Section 439 of Cr.PC, while dealing with cases involving economic offences. The principles that were summarised in this judgment is extracted hereunder: "21. The jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well-settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case. The following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail: (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses or apprehension of threat to the complainant or the witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character, behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ercussions on the development of the country as a whole. In State of Gujarat v. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal [(1987) 2 SCC 364 : 1987 SCC (Cri) 364] this Court, while considering a request of the prosecution for adducing additional evidence, inter alia, observed as under: (SCC p. 371, para 5) "5. ... The entire community is aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to book. 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. 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." 24. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ail. 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. 151. The Hon'ble Apex Court has further observed that 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. Reference in this regard be made to the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Tarun Kumar vs. Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement (supra). The relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid Judgment are being quoted as under: "22. Lastly, it may be noted that as held in catena of decisions, the 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 conspirac....