TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1002
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code against one Pradeep Bagchi on the basis of complaint of Tax Collector, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, for submission of forged papers i.e., Aadhar Card, Electricity Bill and Possession letter for obtaining holding number 0210004194000A1 and 0210004031000A5. 3. The investigation revealed that by submitting the forged documents, a holding number was obtained in name of Pradeep Bagchi for property at Morabadi Mouza, Ward No. 21/19 at Ranchi having an area of the plot measuring 455.00 decimals approximately. 4. Investigation further revealed that the above property belonged to Late B.M. Laxman Rao which was given to the Army and had been in the possession of the Defence, in occupation of the Army since independence. Investigation also reveals that by way of creating a fake owner (Pradeep Bagchi) of the above said property, it was sold to a company M/s Jagatbandhu Tea Estate Pvt. Ltd for which the consideration amount was shown Rs. 7 crores which was highly under value and out of this amount payment amounting to Rs. 25 lakhs only were made into the account of said Pradeep Bagchi and rest of the money was falsely shown to be paid through cheques ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the PMLA, it is evident that the petitioner has acted only under the instruction of the accused no.6-Afsar Ali. (vi) The petitioner has no prior criminal record. the petitioner has neither committed any fraud/cheating or forged any documents, thus, no offences under the aforementioned sections have been committed by the petitioner. (vii) The role of the petitioner was confined/defined only for the instructions given by the accused no.6 Afsar Ali. (viii) There is no assertion that the petitioner attempted to commit any offence delineated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, particularly as delineated in Section 3 of the statute. (ix) The Bariatu Police Station Case No.141/22 has been filed solely against one co-accused, Pradeep Bagchi, with specific allegations. Similarly, the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) 18/2022 has also been instituted solely against Pradeep Bagchi. (x) The petitioner is in custody since 14.04.2023. (xi) This petitioner having no concern with the entire transaction. He is having no concern with the land in question. This petitioner has not received a single penny related with the presen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e in fact proceeds of crime as defined under section 2 (1) (u) of PMLA, 2002. (vi) Thus, the petitioner was knowingly a party and actually involved with the other accomplices in activity connected with the proceeds of crime i.e. its acquisition, use and projecting and claiming the proceeds of crime as untainted property. Thus, the petitioner is guilty of the offence of money laundering as defined under section 3 of PMLA, 2002, punishable under section 4 of PMLA, 2002. (vii) The instant prosecution complaint is backed by documentary evidences and incriminating seizure which are further corroborated from other accused or witnesses during their statements under Section 50 of PMLA, 2002. (viii) The petitioner's claims are merely an attempt to conceal his involvement in illegal activities related to assisting his accomplices in fraudulently acquiring properties. 14. Learned counsel for the Opp. Party-ED, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has submitted that it is not a fit case for grant of regular bail in favour of the petitioner. Analysis 15. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 16. This Court b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he 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;]" 21. It is evident from the aforesaid provision by which the "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. 22. In the explanation, it has been referred that for the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that "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. 23. It is, thus, evident that the reason for giving explanation under Section 2(1)(u) is by way of clarification to the effect that whether as per the substantive provision of Section 2(1)(u), the property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(ii) 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 or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever.]" 28. It is evident from the aforesaid provision that "offence of money-laundering" means 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. 29. It is further evident 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 or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever. 30. The punishment for money laundering has been prov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is for the purpose of removal of doubts, a clarification has been inserted that the expression "Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable" shall mean and shall be deemed to have always meant that all offences under this Act shall be cognizable offences and non-bailable offences notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and accordingly the officers authorised under this Act are empowered to arrest an accused without warrant, subject to the fulfilment of conditions under section 19 and subject to the conditions enshrined under this section 37. The fact about the implication of Section 45 has been interpreted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.(supra) at paragraphs-285, 286 and 316. For ready reference, the said paragraphs are being referred as under:- "285.............The provision post the 2018 Amendment, is in the nature of no bail in relation to the offence of money laundering unless the twin conditions are fulfilled. The twin conditions are that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of offence of money laundering and that he is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y need to be complied with. The Court is required to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. 39. It has further been observed 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. For ready reference, paragraph-17 of the said judgment reads as under:- "17. As well settled by now, the conditions specified under Section 45 are mandatory. They need to be complied with. The Court is required to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d need to be complied with, which is further strengthened by the provisions of Section 65 and also Section 71 of PMLA. 43. 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. 44. 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 petitioner. 45. It needs to refer herein that while dealing with bail applications under UAP Act 1967, the Hon'ble Apex Court recently in the case of Gurwinder Singh Vs. State of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olong custody of petitioner since 14.04.2023 and delay in conclusion of the trial has also been raised. 48. While on the other hand, Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-E.D. has submitted that there is ample material surfaced in course of inquiry, based upon which, the prosecution report was submitted and hence, it cannot be said that there is no legal evidence. It has further been contended that it is settled proposition of law which has been settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the long incarceration (herein about 27 month) or delay in trial alone cannot be ground to release the petitioner on bail, rather in case of scheduled offences/special offences the seriousness of the matter and the societal impact should be taken into consideration by the Court concerned while enlarging the petitioner on bail. 49. This Court, in order to appreciate the rival submission, is of the view that various paragraphs of prosecution complaint upon which the reliance has been placed on behalf of both the parties, needs to be referred herein so as to come to the conclusion as to whether the parameter as fixed under Section 451(i) & (ii) of the PML Act 2002 is being....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mplices namely Bharat Prasad, Lakhan Singh, Rajesh Rai and others. These properties have been sold to different persons in which the cash amount has been distributed between Afshar Ali, Md. Saddam Hussain, Talha Khan @ Sunny, and other associates which prove that these persons are a part of the racket which are habitually involved in forging documents and falsifying records for acquiring proceeds of crime and later using them and projecting them as untainted property. Specific Roles of the Accused/Co-Accused/person abetting in the commission of offence of money laundering by directly/ indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assist or knowingly is a party or is involved in concealment/ possession/acquisition or use in projecting or claiming proceeds of crime as tainted property in terms of section 3 of PMLA Imtiaz Ahmed (accused no.8) The accused Imtiaz Ahmed was actually a party with the other accused persons in the acquisition of the proceeds of crime by way of fraudulent acquisition and sale of land and claiming the said proceeds of crime as untainted property. The accused of person knowingly indulged in acquisition of proceeds of crime amounting to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., and Imtiaz Ahmed(present petitioner), have actively been involved in sequestering several pieces of land situated in Ranchi and its vicinity by manipulating and forging the original records available at the Circle Offices in connivance with certain government officials/record keepers, including Bhanu Pratap Prasad, Revenue Sub-Inspector, Baragai, Ranchi. The Circle Office, deeds/documents/records recovered and seized during the course of searches conducted on April 13, 2023, corroborate the fact that the accused persons have been running a racket involved in the illegal acquisition of lands by converting non-saleable land into saleable lands for monetary benefits. They have acquired proceeds of crime through the aforementioned criminal activities and thus committed the offence of money laundering. The properties are used to commit offences under this Act and scheduled offences and derive proceeds, further projecting their activities and acquired properties as 'untainted property'. 53. It is evident from the prosecution complaint that accused/petitioner was actually a party with the other accused persons in the acquisition of the proceeds of crime by way of fraudulent a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....esent petitioner), Md. Saddam Hussain, Talha Khan @ Sunny and Faiyaz Khan in manipulating sale deeds of landed properties. The statement also reveals that Afshar Ali, Imtiaz Ahmed (Petitioner), Faiyaz Khan Talha Khan Sunny are experts in altering old property deeds. These persons have forged stamps/seals which they use in making fake sale deeds. They have good contacts with Land Registry offices and one of the said officers is Bhanu Pratap Prasad who works in Circle Office, Baragai, Ranchi. Bhanu Pratap Prasad assists Afshar Ali and others in acquiring properties illegally. 57. It needs to refer herein that the three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rohit Tandon vs. Directorate of Enforcement, (2018) 11 SCC 46 has held that the statements of witnesses recorded by Prosecution-ED are admissible in evidence, in view of Section 50. Such statements may make out a formidable case about the involvement of the accused in the commission of the offence of money laundering. 58. In the instant case, it has been found that during the course of investigation from the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 50 of the P.M.L.A that the petitioner had directly indul....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y laid down that it is not necessary for a person to be shown as an accused in the scheduled offence for him to be prosecuted under the PMLA, provided there exist proceeds of crime derived from a scheduled offence and the person has indulged in or facilitated any process or activity connected with such proceeds of crime. 64. In the aforesaid case i.e. Pawana Dibbur (supra) it has further been observed by referring the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. (supra) that the condition precedent for the existence of proceeds of crime is the existence of a scheduled offence. At paragraph-15 the finding has been given therein that on plain reading of Section 3 of the Act, 2002, an offence under Section 3 can 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 agai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioner and, thus, investigation insofar as the petitioner is concerned, is complete and therefore, no purpose would be served in keeping the petitioner in judicial custody. 70. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for Opp. Party-ED has submitted that the mere fact that investigation is complete does not necessarily confer a right on the accused/petitioner to be released on bail. 71. In the context of aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the petitioner, it would be relevant to note here that in the instant case mere filing of the charge-sheet does not cause material change in circumstances. 72. Further, it is settled proposition of law that the filing of chargesheet is not a circumstance that tilts the scales in favour of the accused for grant of bail and needless to say, filing of the charge-sheet does not in any manner lessen the allegations made by the prosecution. 73. At this juncture, it would be apposite to refer to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Virupakshappa Gouda Vs. State of Karnataka, (2017) 5 SCC 406, wherein, at paragraph-12, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under: "12. On a perusal of the order pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om 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. Clause 2(1)(u) also clarifies that even the value of any such property will also be the proceeds of crime and in the instant case from perusal of paragraph of the prosecution complaint it is evident that the petitioner is not only involved rather his involvement is direct in procuring the proceeds of crime by way of connivance with the other accused persons. 79. 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 mention in prosecution complaint. 80. So far as the issue of period of custody as agitated by learned counsel for the petitioner is concerned, it is settled proposition of law which has been settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the long incarceration (herein about 28 month) or delay in trial alone cannot be groun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant case cannot be used as a ground to grant bail. Hence, the aforesaid argument on behalf of the appellant cannot be accepted." 84. Thus, on the basis of the aforesaid settled position of law it is evident that mere delay in trial pertaining to grave offences as one involved in the instant case cannot be used as a ground to grant bail. 85. Admittedly, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 14.04.2023 but delay, under the aforesaid circumstances, does not entitle the petitioner to bail. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tarun Kumar v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1486, has authoritatively held that while the period of custody may be a relevant factor, it cannot by itself override the gravity of the offence, the seriousness of allegations or the statutory twin conditions under Section 45 of the Act 2002. 86. Similarly, in Satyendar Kumar Jain v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 306, the Hon'ble Apex Court refused bail despite protracted proceedings, noting that the complexity inherent in economic offences often necessitates lengthy trials. 87. It is also pertinent that delays frequently arise from procedural applications and liti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy itself as to whether there is a genuine case against the accu....