TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 1818
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as "PMLA Act"). 2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contends that since the petitioner is hardly literate and is only 3rd standard pass, he verified from the revenue authorities as to which of his properties were attached by the respondent department and came to know that two properties had no lien or charge by the Enforcement Directorate in the revenue records. 3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further contends that because of the financial crisis, since, the whole of the family of the petitioner was involved on account of proceedings under the PMLA Act, therefore, the petitioner disposed of part of the above two properties. 4. Learned senior counsel of the petitioner further contends that the action of the petitioner, in executing the sale deeds was absolutely ill-conceived, imprudent and careless. The petitioner in his foolish wisdom on the presumption that there is no attachment over these properties, the petitioner sold the two properties and had no mens rea nor any criminal mal-intention to do so. 5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contends that the action of the petitioner in disposing of the above two properties, though is fully il....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Chunni Lal Gaba was arraigned as accused in the above FIR No. 92 dated 3.06.2014. However, he (Chunni Lal Gaba) was acquitted by this Court vide Judgment dated 13.2.2019. 10. Vide order dated 27.1.2016, the Special Judge (under PMLA), Patiala took cognizance of the complaint and proceeded to summon the petitioner. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner filed an application for pre-arrest bail before the Special Judge (under PMLA), Patiala and vide order dated 12.8.2016, his application was dismissed. 11. The petitioner then approached this Court vide CRM-M-42455-2016 seeking the relief of pre-arrest bail. Vide order dated 28.2.2017 (Annexure P-1), this Court was pleased to admit the petitioner to pre-arrest bail by imposing the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Special Court or this Court; (ii) the applicant shall continue to appear before the Special Court and shall not hamper the ongoing trial; (iii)the applicant shall continue to avail the concession of bail subject to the attachment/seizure of his immovable properties already identified by the Enforcement Directorate; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d offender on 25.05.2021. The petitioner then filed a petition bearing No. CRM-M-3510-2021 before this Court challenging the cancellation of his bail and the same was withdrawn by him on 16.07.2021 (Annexure P-4). Subsequently, on 19.7.2021, the petitioner surrendered and sought regular bail before the Court below. 17. The petitioner also approached this Court, vide CRM-M-30946-2021 seeking regular bail, which was dismissed, vide order dated 07.03.2022. The petitioner challenged the rejection order dated 07.03.2022 before Hon'ble the Supreme Court, by filing SLP (Crl) 5467-2022, which was disposed of on 30.05.2022 and the following order was passed. "Permission to file Special Leave Petition is granted. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner after arguing for some time seeks liberty to withdraw the special leave petition with further liberty to approach the High Court after six months." 18. Now the petitioner has again approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail. 19. On notice, a reply dated 09.03.2023 has been filed by the respondent stating therein that the first regular bail of the petitioner has been rightly rejected by this Court on 07.03.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t (NDPS) with a sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years/ to pay fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- u/s 21 of the NDPS Act and rigorous imprisonment of one year and fine of Rs. 20,000/- u/s 25-A of NDPS Act, vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 13.2.2019 passed in NDPS RT No. 22/22.07.2013/01.07.2017, CIS No. NDPS 118/2018. 25. It is further stated in the reply that one of the co-accused and brother of the petitioner/accused, Chunni Lal Gaba had already created a lot of hurdles in the cause of justice as he had willfully evaded the process of law during the course of trial in COMA No. 13/2016 since year 2016 till he surrendered before the trial Court on 24.01.2020, which delayed the framing of charges in the instant case. 26. The reply further states that an application was moved by the petitioner for grant of his regular bail in the Special Court (PMLA), Mohali on 19.07.2021. However, the Special Court (PMLA), Mohali dismissed the application filed by the petitioner on 30.07.2021. 27. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of the case. CONCLUSION 28. A perusal of the record shows that the only plea taken by the....