TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 552
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... No. 678/2024 dt. 29.04.2024 against Shiva Kumar Deora, Complaint Case No. 1280/2024 dt. 04.06.2024 against Sumit Gupta and Complaint Case No. 1281/2024 dt. 04.06.2024 against Amit Gupta u/s 132 of the GST Act r/w section 20 of the Integrated GST Act, 2017 r/w section 34, 120A, 193, 195A, 201, 203, 204, 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 of IPC in the court of Economic Office, Jamshedpur. Since u/s 420, 467 and 471 of the IPC, above stated complaints filed by the DGGI, Jamshedpur are scheduled offence and as per paragraph 1 Part A of the schedule provided under PMLA 2002, the ECIR No. RNZO/18/2004 was recorded on 23.09.2024 for conducting an investigation under PMLA, 2002. 3. As per aforesaid three complaint cases, it is revealed that a syndicate is operational in Jharkhand, West Bengal, Delhi and other States of the Country, Syndicate is indulged in creation, operation and management of fake companies / firms for passing on ineligible ITC (Input Tax Credit) by issuing fake GST bills, without actually delivering the related goods and services and the persons namely Shiva Kumar Deora, Sumit Kumar Gupta and Amit Kumar Gupta are a part of the said syndicate who are knowingly a party w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....98/2022 u/s 420, 406, 120B of the IPC registered at Bowbazar Police Station, Kolkata against Amit Agarwal @ Vicky Bhalotia in relation to the matter pertaining to availing fake ITC to the tune of Rs. 5,05,91,296/-. 10. Amit Agarwal is one of the directors of Greentech Steel Private Limited which are indulged in claiming ineligible ITC on strength of bogus invoices without actually delivering the goods and services. Shiva Kumar Deora and Amit Agarwal @ Vicky Bhalotia are also common directors / proprietors of various firms. From the scrutiny of the bank accounts maintained in the name of TE Udhyog Private Ltd., it is revealed that Rs. 76,98,500/- have been debited to Amit Gupta on various occasions. It is further revealed that Amit Gupta is one of the former directors in the said company namely TE Udhyog Pvt. Ltd. Further, several transactions have been identified between the entities beneficially owned by Shiva Kumar Deora and Amit Gupta with the said Amit Agarwal @ Vicky Bhalotia through his ICICI Bank Account. 11. Thus, it is evident that there is a nexus between Shiva Kumar Deora and Amit Gupta with Amit Agarwal alias Vicky Bhalotia in illegal claiming of fake ITCs through fak....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of 2025 for grant of bail which was rejected, vide order dated 19.06.2025 by the learned Spl. Judge, PML Act, Ranchi, hence, the instant bail application. Argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner 17. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has taken the following grounds in assailing the order impugned that: - (i) 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. (ii) It has been contended that the petitioner has been arrested arbitrarily and there was no necessity to arrest the petitioner, due to the reason that, search has been done on 08.05.2025 and on the same date, he was arrested by the E.D. (iii) The petitioner was never summoned by the prosecution in this case. (iv) There was no material before the E.D. to "reasons to believe" that the petitioner has committed any offence. (v) Both the "ground of arrest" and reason to believe are identical and ground of arrest lacks additional parameters under Section 41 Cr.P.C., in addition to satisfaction under Section 19(1) of the Act 2002. (vi) The Officer forming reasons to b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....no offences under the aforementioned sections have been committed by the petitioner. (xii) 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. (xiii) The petitioner is in custody since 08.05.2025. 18. Learned counsel for the petitioner, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has submitted that the learned court while considering the prayer for bail ought to have taken into consideration all these aspects of the matter both legal and factual but having not done so, serious error has been committed. Hence, it is a fit case where the petitioner is to be given the privilege of bail. Argument advanced by the learned counsel for the Opp. Party/Directorate of Enforcement: 19. Per contra, Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the Directorate of Enforcement, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail by taking the following grounds: - (i) It has been contended that the petitioner is a member of syndicate of co-accused persons namely Shive Kumar Deora, Mohit Deora, Amit Gupta etc. and he is also Director of fake shell companies as also along with them, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... his involvement in shell entities used for laundering proceeds of crime, thereby, justifying the subsequent arrest. (viii) The contention of the Petitioner that the reasons to believe and grounds of arrest are identical, are factually misconceived and legally untenable as both the "Reasons to Believe" and "Grounds of Arrest" were recorded separately, in writing, and were duly communicated to the Petitioner at the time of arrest. (ix) Reference to Section 41 of Cr.P.C. and its parameters is wholly misplaced in the context of PMLA. The arrest under Section 19(1) of PMLA does not require compliance with Section 41 Cr.P.C., since the later governs police arrests under the Code of Criminal Procedure. PMLA being a special law, the provisions of Section 19(1) of PMLA operate independently, with in-built safeguards including the requirement of written reasons to believe, furnishing of grounds of arrest, and production before the Ld. Special Court within 24 hours and the aforesaid safeguard has fully been complied herein. (x) The petitioner has failed to explain about the transactions which has been credited in his account in the statement as recorded under Section 50 of PMLA. (xi)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elhi. (xviii) The syndicate's criminal activities, as detained in the DGGI complaints, followed a meticulous and multi-layered modus operandi, executed in a series of systematic steps designed to generate and launder massive amounts of fraudulent ITC. (xix) It has further been contended that the petitioner directly controlled several shell firms, including M/s Aurorus Metal Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Bizzare Commercial Pvt. Ltd. using dummy directions to whom he made monthly payments. He also facilitated the syndicate by providing his own property for the registration of these bogus firms. (xx) The "whats-app" chats recovered during the DGGI investigation indicate his direct involvement in giving operational instructions and managing GST related deceptions. He was linked to fake ITC availment of approximately Rs.48.10 Crores through 9 firms. 20. 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 21. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 22. This Court, before appreciating the argument advanced on behalf of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence;]" 27. 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. 28. 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. 29. 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 of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tly 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.]" 34. 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. 35. 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. 36. The punishment for money laundering has been provided under Section 4 of the Act, 2002. 37. Further, the specific provision has been made under the PML Act, 2002 to be followed at the time of arrest, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etitioners was to be accepted, it would follow that it is only upon projecting or claiming the property in question as untainted property, the offence would be complete. This would undermine the efficacy of the legislative intent behind Section 3 of the Act and also will be in disregard of the view expressed by the FATF in connection with the occurrence of the word "and" preceding the expression "projecting or claiming" therein. 129. This Court in Pratap Singh v. State 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 create....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....width of expression "proceeding" in the earlier part of this judgment and held that it applies to proceeding before the Adjudicating Authority or the Special Court, as the case may be. Nevertheless, sub-section (2) empowers the authorised officials to issue summon to any person. We fail to understand as to how Article 20(3) would come into play in respect of process of recording statement pursuant to such summon which is only for the purpose 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ive attitude of silence or submission on his part. Nor is there any reason to think that the protection in respect of the evidence so procured is confined to what transpires at the trial in the court room. The phrase used in article 20(3) is "to be a witness" and not to "appear as a witness". It follows that the protection afforded to an accused in so far as it is related to the phrase "to be a witness" is not merely in respect of 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ule of evidence. 342. It is, thus, clear that the power invested in the officials is one for conducting inquiry into the matters relevant for ascertaining existence of proceeds of crime and the involvement of persons in the process or activity connected therewith so as to initiate appropriate action against such person including of seizure, attachment and confiscation of the property eventually vesting in the Central Government." 43. 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. 44. So far as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns, it is plainly clear that it is a special legislation to deal with the subject of money laundering activities having transnational impact on the financial systems including sovereignty and integrity of the countries. This is not an ordinary offence. To deal with such serious offence, stringent measures are provided in the 2002 Act for prevention of money laundering and combating menace of money laundering, including for attachment and confiscation of proceeds of crime and to prosecute persons involved in the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime. In view of the gravity of the fallout of money laundering activities having transnational impact, a special procedural law for prevention and regulation, including to prosecute the person involved, has been enacted, grouping the offenders involved in the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime as a separate class from ordinary criminals. The offence of money laundering has been regarded as an aggravated form of crime "world over". It is, therefore, a separate class of offence requiring effective and stringent measures to combat the menace of money laundering. 316. As a result, we have no hesitation ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....extual. 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." 49. 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 into consideration the law laid down by the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. (supra), it has been laid down that since 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 that the accused is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. 50. It has further been observed that as per the statutory presumption permitted under Section 24 of the Act, the Court or the Authori....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rded 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 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. 53. So far as the issue of grant of bail under Section 45 of the Act, 2002 is concerned, in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. (supra) it has been held therein by making observation that whatever form the relief is couched including the nature of proceedings, be it under Section 438 of the 1973 Code or for that matter, by invoking the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court, the underlying principles and rigors of Section 45 of the 2002 must come into play and without exception ought to be reckoned to uphold the objectives of the 2002 Act, which is a special legislation providing for stringent regulatory measures for combating the menace of money-laundering. 54. The Hon'ble Apex Court....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the suggestions, the offences have been categorised and guidelines are sought to be laid down for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and keeping in mind the statutory provisions. 3. We are inclined to accept the guidelines and make them a part of the order of the Court for the benefit of the courts below. The guidelines are as under: 'Categories/Types of Offences (A) Offences punishable with imprisonment of 7 years or less not falling in Categories B & D. (B) Offences punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for more than 7 years. (C) Offences punishable under Special Acts containing stringent provisions for bail like NDPS (Section 37), PMLA (Section 45), UAPA [Section 43-D(5)], Companies Act, [Section 212(6)], etc. (D) Economic offences not covered by Special Acts. REQUISITE CONDITIONS (1) Not arrested during investigation. (2) Cooperated throughout in the investigation including appearing before investigating officer whenever called. (No need to forward such an accused along with the charge-sheet (Siddharth v. State of U.P. [Siddharth v. State of U.P., (2022) 1 SCC 676 : (2022) 1 SCC (Cri) 423]) C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pe. The form of the words used in proviso to Section 43D(5)- 'shall not be released' in contrast with the form of the words as found in Section 437(1) CrPC - 'may be released' - suggests the intention of the Legislature to make bail, the exception and jail, the rule." 59. The reason for making reference of this judgment is that in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and Anr. (supra), the UAPA has also been brought under the purview of category 'c' wherein while observing that in the UAPA Act, it comes under the category 'c' which also includes money laundering offence wherein the bail has been directed to be granted if the investigation is complete but the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gurwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab and Anr. (supra) has taken the view by making note that the penal offences as enshrined under the provision of UAPA are also under category 'c' making reference that jail is the rule and bail is the exception. 60. In the backdrop of the aforesaid legal provisions and settled law, this court is now adverting to merit of the case. Issue of legality of Arrest 61. Now coming to the ground as has been raised on behalf of the petitioner that at the time of arrest the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gistrate's court." 64. It is evident from perusal of the Section 19 of PMLA which gives the power to arrest if the officer concerned has "reason to believe" on the basis of material in his possession, that the person is guilty. As per Section 19 the arrest has to be on the basis of material in possession with the ED, there is reason to believe that the accused is guilty of the offence, with the reason recorded in writing and the grounds for arrest should be communicated with the accused. 65. As discussed herein above the entire PML Act, 2002 fell for consideration before the three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. (supra) wherein the provision of Section 19(1) has also been taken into consideration, which would be evident from the relevant paragraphs, which reads as under: "371. The next issue is : Whether it is necessary to furnish copy of ECIR to the person concerned apprehending arrest or at least after his arrest? Section 19(1) of the 2002 Act postulates that after arrest, as soon as may be, the person should be informed about the grounds for such arrest. This stipulation is compliant with the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 19 of the 2002 Act, is contemporaneously made aware about the grounds of his arrest. This is compliant with the mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution." 66. It is evident from the aforesaid consideration as referred in the aforesaid judgment that once the person is informed of the grounds of arrest, that would be sufficient compliance with the mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution and it is not necessary that a copy of the ECIR be supplied in every case to the person concerned, as such, a condition is not mandatory and it is enough if ED discloses the grounds of arrest to the person concerned at the time of arrest. 67. It needs to refer herein the judgment which has come in the case of V. Senthil Balaji Vs. State Represented by Deputy Director & Ors. (supra) which was passed on 07.08.2023 wherein consideration has been given with respect to the issue of Section 19(1) holding therein that that after forming a reason to believe that the person has been guilty of an offence punishable under PMLA, the officer concerned is at liberty to arrest him, while performing his mandatory duty of recording the reasons, and that the said exercise has to be followed by way of an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Corruption Bureau, Panchkula, received information that Sudhir Parmar was showing favouritism to Lalit Goyal, the owner of IREO Group, and also to Roop Bansal and his brother, Basant Bansal, the owners of M3M Group. This led to the registration of FIR No. 0006 dated 17-4-2023. On 12-5-2023, ED issued summons to M3M India Pvt. Ltd., calling upon it to provide information and documents pertaining to transactions with certain companies. Thereafter, on 1-6-2023, ED raided the properties of M3M Group and effected seizures of assets and bank accounts. Roop Bansal was arrested by ED on 8-6-2023 apropos the first ECIR. 4. Apprehending that action would be taken against them also in the context of the first ECIR, Pankaj Bansal and Basant Bansal secured [Basant Bansal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2023) 2 HCC (Del) 700], [Pankaj Bansal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC OnLine Del 3590] interim protection from the Delhi High Court in Bail Applications Nos. 2030 and 2031 of 2023. By separate orders dated 9-6-2023 [Basant Bansal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2023) 2 HCC (Del) 700] passed therein, the Delhi High Court noted that Pankaj Bansal and Basant Bansal had not been named in the first ECIR and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the second ECIR, were in exercise of power under Section 19(1) PMLA. The arrested persons were then taken to Panchkula, Haryana, and produced before the learned Vacation Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula. There, they were served with the remand application filed by ED. 10. It was the specific case of the father and son in their writ petitions before the High Court that their arrest under the provisions of PMLA was a wanton abuse of power/authority and an abuse of process by ED, apart from being blatantly illegal and unconstitutional. They also asserted that ED acted in violation of the safeguards provided in Section 19 PMLA. In this milieu, they made the following prayers: "In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, it is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ(s), order(s) and/or direction(s) to: A. Read down and/or read into as well as expound, deliberate upon and delineate the ambit, sweep and scope of Section 19(1) PMLA in consonance with the principles, inter alia, enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India [Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Section 19 PMLA puts it beyond doubt that the authorised officer has to record in writing the reasons for forming the belief that the person proposed to be arrested is guilty of an offence punishable under the 2002 Act. Section 19(2) requires the authorised officer to forward a copy of the arrest order along with the material in his possession, referred to in Section 19(1), to the adjudicating authority in a sealed envelope. Though it is not necessary for the arrested person to be supplied with all the material that is forwarded to the adjudicating authority under Section 19(2), he/she has a constitutional and statutory right to be "informed" of the grounds of arrest, which are compulsorily recorded in writing by the authorised officer in keeping with the mandate of Section 19(1) PMLA. As already noted hereinbefore, it seems that the mode of informing this to the persons arrested is left to the option of ED's authorised officers in different parts of the country i.e. to either furnish such grounds of arrest in writing or to allow such grounds to be read by the arrested person or be read over and explained to such person. 45. On the above analysis, to give true meaning and p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... judgment passed by Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (supra) has observed that the law laid down by the three-Judges Bench in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary that Section 19(1) PMLA has a reasonable nexus with the purposes and objects sought to be achieved by the PML Act and that the said provision is also compliant with the mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, any observation made or any finding recorded by the Division Bench of lesser number of Judges contrary to the said ratio laid down in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary would be not in consonance with the jurisprudential wisdom expounded by the Constitution Benches. For ready reference, the relevant paragraph is being quoted as under : "16. In view of the aforestated proposition of law propounded by the Constitution Benches, there remains no shadow of doubt that the law laid down by the three-Judge Bench in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary [Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, (2023) 12 SCC 1 : 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929] that Section 19(1) PMLA has a reasonable nexus with the purposes and objects sought to be achieved by the PML Act and that the said provision is also compliant with the mandate of Article 22(1) of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en categorically held that so long as the person has been informed about the grounds of his arrest, that is sufficient compliance with mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution. It is also observed that the arrested person before being produced before the Special Court within twenty four hours or for that purposes of remand on each occasion, the Court is free to look into the relevant records made available by the authority about the involvement of the arrested person in the offence of money laundering. Therefore, in our opinion the person arrested, if he is informed or made aware orally about the grounds of arrest at the time of his arrest and is furnished a written communication about the grounds of arrest as soon as may be i.e. as early as possible and within reasonably convenient and requisite time of twenty-four hours of his arrest, that would be sufficient compliance of not only Section 19 PMLA but also of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. 23. As discernible from the judgment in Pankaj Bansal case [Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India, (2024) 7 SCC 576] also noticing the inconsistent practice being followed by the officers arresting the persons under Section 19 PML....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 3-10-2023 vide arrest memo. Thereafter, the appellant was presented in the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-02, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi on 4-10-2023, sometime before 6.00 a.m. which fact is manifested from the remand order and the appellant was remanded to seven days' police custody vide order dated 4-10-2023. The proceedings of remand have been seriously criticized as being manipulated by Shri Kapil Sibal, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and aspersions of subsequent insertions in the remand order have been made. 75. The appellant promptly questioned his arrest and the police custody remand granted by the learned Remand Judge vide order dated 4-10-2023 by preferring Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 7278 of 2023 in the High Court of Delhi which stands rejected by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi vide judgment dated 13-10-2023. The said order is subjected to challenge by special leave before the Hon'ble Apex Court. 76. The Hon'ble Apex Court has taken into consideration the ratio of the judgment rendered in the case of Pankaj Bansal Vs. Union of India & Ors (supra). The arrest of the said appellant was on 03.10.2023 but the jud....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lief and reasoning based on the evidence that establishes the arrestee's guilt is also the legal necessity. As the "reasons to believe" are accorded by the authorised officer, the onus to establish satisfaction of the said condition will be on the DoE and not on the arrestee. The Hon'ble Apex Court while taking in to consideration the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra) is a decision rendered by a three Judge Bench, hence, after formulating the questions of law has referred the matter for consideration by a larger Bench. For ready reference, the relevant paragraphs are being quoted as under: "11. Arrest under Section 19(1) of the PML Act may occur prior to the filing of the prosecution complaint and before the Special Judge takes cognizance. Till the prosecution complaint is filed, there is no requirement to provide the accused with a copy of the ECIR. The ECIR is not a public document. Thus, to introduce checks and balances, Section 19(1) imposes safeguards to protect the rights and liberty of the arrestee. This is in compliance with the mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. V. Senthil Balaji v. State similarly sta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 19(1) of the Act 2002. The factual aspect of the case is like that between 2011 and 2016; the appellant was holding the post of Transport Minister in the Government of Tamil Nadu. Broadly, the allegation against the appellant is that while discharging his duties as a Minister, in connivance with his personal assistant and his brother, he collected large amounts by promising job opportunities to several persons in various positions in the Transport Department. This led to the registering of three First Information Reports against the appellant and others. The said First Information Reports are FIR no. 441 of 2015 dated 29th October 2015 (CC Nos. 22 and 24 of 2021), FIR No. 298 of 2017 registered on 9th September 2017 (CC No. 19 of 2020) and FIR no. 344 dated 13th August 2018 (CC No. 25 of 2020). 79. In the first FIR, six charge sheets have been filed. More than 2000 accused have been named in the charge sheets. 550 witnesses have been named. In the case of the second FIR, there are 14 accused named in the chargesheet. In connection with this FIR, 24 witnesses have been cited. In the third FIR, 24 accused have been named in the charge sheet and 50 prosecution witnesses have b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'s case, he was arrested on 10th June 2024 at about 10.30 a.m. at his office premises on the 3rd-5th floor of HUDA City Centre, Gurugram, Haryana. He was taken to DLF Police Station, Section 29, Gurugram. He was produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate (in charge) at Gurgaon on 11th June 2024 at 3.30 p.m. 84. It had been contended that there was a violation of Article 22(2) of the Constitution and Section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, Cr.P.C.'). The allegation is that neither in the remand report nor in the order dated 11th June 2024 passed by the learned Magistrate was the time of arrest mentioned. The FIR was registered at the instance of the 2nd respondent. 85. Further, in the aforesaid case a vital issue was emerged when the learned counsel appearing for the appellant produced photographs which showed that while he was admitted to the hospital, he was handcuffed and chained to the hospital bed. Therefore, a notice was issued on 4th October 2024 to the Medical Superintendent of PGIMS, calling upon him to file an affidavit stating whether the appellant was handcuffed and chained to the hospital bed. The order dated 21st October 2024 reco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arrest, the mandatory requirement is to be fulfilled. Herein, the mandatory requirement as per Article 19(1) of the PML Act, 2002 coupled with the judgment as referred hereinabove by laying down the ratio to communicate the "grounds for arrest" and "reason to believe" in writing and as such this Court has to consider as to whether the statutory command in the facts and circumstances of the present case has been followed or not, if yes, then the arrest cannot be held to be invalid and if no, then certainly the arrest would be held to be invalid. 90. Now, adverting to the factual aspect of the present case and on consideration of the submissions advanced on behalf of petitioner, this Court has gone through the record, particularly, Annexure-2 and 3 appended with the instant petition/application, wherefrom, it is evident that petitioner was arrested on 08.05.2025 and thereafter, he has been produced forthwith before the Court within 24 hours for remand. From Annexure-3, it appears that arrest of the petitioner was made on 08.05.2025 under Section 19 of the Act 2002 after recording detail "reasons to believe" based on material which indicates the petitioner's involvement in the allege....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ope of judicial review at the pre-trial stage, is limited. 96. Further, the submission of the Petitioner that he was never previously summoned is factually incorrect. He was summoned under Section 50 PMLA on 08.05.2025 and his statement was recorded, which would be evident from Annexure-2 of the petition. Further, the contention of the Petitioner that the reasons to believe and grounds of arrest are identical, is factually misconceived and legally untenable as both the "Reasons to Believe" and "Grounds of Arrest" were recorded separately, in writing, and were duly communicated to the Petitioner at the time of arrest, which would be evident from Annexure-3 of the petition. 97. It requires to refer herein that the arrest under Section 19(1) of PMLA does not require compliance with Section 41 Cr.P.C., since, later governs police arrests under the Code of Criminal Procedure. PMLA being a special law, the provisions of Section 19(1) of PMLA operate independently, with in-built safeguards including the requirement of written reasons to believe, furnishing of grounds of arrest and production before the Ld. Special Court within 24 hours. 98. Thus, on the basis of the discussion made her....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Court. The arrest cannot be declared invalid merely because the Petitioner seeks production of a document that has no bearing on the substantive legality of arrest. 103. In Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that high-ranking officers such as Assistant Directors are empowered to arrest under Section 19(1), provided they form the required belief on the basis of material in their possession. There is no statutory requirement that such material must be collected only by them personally. 104. It is evident from record that at the time of arrest, the Petitioner/Accused was not only informed of the grounds for his arrest but was also provided with the detailed "Reasons to Believe", the "Grounds of Arrest", and the "Arrest Order" in writing which is conclusively evidenced by the Petitioner's own sign, handwritten acknowledgment on the document itself, confirming he received the 'Reasons to Believe' and other arrest documents in writing and in original at the time of his arrest. A true copy of the "Reasons to believe" u/s 19(1) of the PMLA for arrest of present petitioner and "Grounds of Arrest" is also being annexed her....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting an investigation under PMLA, 2002. 108. As per aforesaid three complaint cases, it is revealed that a syndicate is operational in Jharkhand, West Bengal, Delhi and other states of the country. Syndicate is indulged in creation, operation and management of fake companies / firms for passing on ineligible ITC (Input Tax Credit) by issuing fake GST bills, without actually delivering the related goods and services, and the persons namely Shiva Kumar Deora, Sumit Kumar Gupta and Amit Kumar Gupta were a part of the said syndicate who were knowingly a party with each other and or directly involved in illegal activities of creation of fake companies / firms in the name of various dummy directors/ proprietors in order to avail and pass on ITC to several end beneficiaries in lieu of money, which are proceeds of crime. 109. Further, it has been transpired from the complaints that several bogus GST invoices have been generated in Delhi and have traveled to Jharkhand via West Bengal in three to four layers. A portion of these bogus ITCs have also been transferred to other States such a Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Odisha and bogus ITC claims have also been taken....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Udhyog Private Ltd., it is revealed that Rs. 76,98,500/- have been debited to accused Amit Gupta on various occasions. It is further revealed that Amit Gupta is one of the former directors in the said company namely TE Udhyog Pvt. Ltd. Further, several transactions have been identified between the entities beneficially owned by Shiva Kumar Deora and Amit Gupta with the present petitioner through his ICICI Bank Account. 116. Thus, it has been stated that there is a nexus between Shiva Kumar Deora and Amit Gupta with present petitioner in illegal claiming of fake ITCs through fake firms/companies. 117. Form scrutiny of the HDFC Bank Account no. 50100055793602 maintained in the name of petitioner, it is revealed that a huge amount of Rs. 16,64,74,760/- has been credited during the period from 28.10.2016 to 02.02.2025, out of which Rs. 3,41,60,151/- have been credited from the bank account of Greentech Steel Enterprises during the period 01.10.2020 to 17.12.2024 and Rs. 4,49,54,750/- have been debited from the said Greentech Steel Enterprises during the period from 03.04.2021 to 16.11.2024. 118. Further Rs. 3,24,92,300/- and Rs. 2,54,00,000/- have been credited and debited from Gree....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irms. C. Orchestrated Control and Management by the Syndicate Masterminds: Shri Amit Agarwal @ Vicky Bhalotia (Accused-4) acted as a key local operative and mastermind of the syndicate based in Jamshedpur. He directly controlled several shell firms, including M/s Aurorus Metals Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Bizzare Commercial Pvt Ltd., using dummy directors to whom he made monthly payments. He also facilitated the syndicate by providing his own property for the registration of these bogus firms. WhatsApp chats recovered during the DGGI investigation indicated, his direct involvement in giving operational instructions and managing GST-related deceptions. He was linked to fake IIC availment of approximately 48.19 Crores through 9 firms he directly controlled, and further investigation has revealed his deep nexus with Shiva Kumar Deora and Amit Gupta in this criminal enterprise 3.3 Amount involved under PMLA 3. Furthermore, the investigation has identified that the sub-syndicate controlled by Amit Agarwal @ Vicky Bhalotia (Accused-4) in Jamshedpur, through 9 firms under his direct or indirect control, availed irregular and inadmissible GST ITC to the tune of approximately Rs. 48.19 Crore....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... witnesses. 9.6 Statement of Smt. Anindita Banerjee (recorded on 04.06.2025) (RUD-27) Smt. Anindita Banerjee, a graduate, stated that following her husband's death in 2017, she was in a precarious financial situation. She was recruited by Shiva Kumar Deora (Accused-1) and Amit Gupta (Accused-3) for a purported work-from-home job with a monthly salary of Rs.12,500. She stated that she was made a director in shell companies like M/s RNR Metal and Steel Private Limited and M/s SBAG Metal and Iron Private Limited entirely without her knowledge, a fact she only discovered after Shiva Kumar Deora's arrest by DGGI in February 2024. She categorically stated that the accused misused her personal KYC documents, along with those of her children (Panchadeep Nag Choudhury and Nijhum Nag Chowdhury), to create this web of entities. She vehemently denied any knowledge of the fraudulent activities, including the generation of fake invoices or the illegal passing of ITC. Upon discovering the fraud, she filed a formal complaint with the Kolkata Police, corroborating her claim of being a victim of identity theft. 9.7 Statement of Ms. Nijhum Nag Chowdhury (recorded on 54.06.2025) (RUD-24....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ay flow of illicit funds has been identified. Funds Flowing from Agarwal's Entity: The bank account of M/s TE Udhyog Private Ltd. (IndusInd Bank A/C No.250023121980), a company where Amit Agarwal was a director, reveals fund transfers totaling Rs.76,98,500/- to Amit Kumar Gupta, the main syndicate's financial manager. Funds Flowing into Agarwal's Account: Scrutiny of Amit Agarwal's personal HDFC Bank Account (No.50100055793602) shows it was used as a primary conduit for laundering proceeds of crime, receiving staggering credits of Rs.16,64,74,760/- between 2016 and 2025. A significant portion of these funds originated from shell entities controlled by the main syndicate, including M/s Greentech Steel Enterprises, M/s Greentech Minerals Pvt Ltd, and M/s Bizzare Commercial Pvt Ltd. The circular movement of funds from known shell companies through his personal account, as detailed in the table below, irrefutably proves that Amit Agarwal @ Vicky Bhalotia was not an independent operator but a key player in the larger conspiracy, laundering funds and availing fraudulent ITC from the entities controlled by Shiva Kumar Deora and others. 11.7 evidence from unexplained cash deposits ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ransactions and conceal their criminal origin. His personal bank account was actively used as a conduit to receive and layer illicit funds from the broader syndicate, demonstrating his role in concealing the proceeds of their joint criminal enterprise 3. Use and Integration: The investigation revealed that Amit Agarwal was a significant beneficiary of the fraud. The illicit fund were used to make substantial investments in real estate and his business activities, thereby integrating the proceeds of crime into the legitimate economy and projecting them as untainted assets." 126. From the aforementioned paragraphs of the prosecution complaint, it is evident that the petitioner is a member of syndicate of co-accused persons namely Shive Kumar Deora, Mohit Deora, Amit Gupta etc. and he is also Director of fake shell companies an along with them deliberately generating and availing fake Input Tax Credit (ITC) by issuing bogus invoices and all of them are a party with each other in acquisition, possession, use and concealment of proceeds of crime as well as claiming the said proceeds of crime as untainted property and they have deliberately generated proceeds of crime to acquire a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... entities, for which he could not provide a legitimate explanation. 133. In his statement also, he had confessed to the detailed modus operandi, which involved creating bogus bills and using a network of 'Angadias (hawala operators) to return funds in cash after deducting commission. This was a deliberate mechanism to layer transactions and conceal their criminal origin. His, personal bank account was actively used as a conduit to receive and layer illicit funds from the broader syndicate, demonstrating his role in concealing the proceeds of their joint criminal enterprise. 134. The investigation revealed that the present petitioner was a significant beneficiary of the fraud. The illicit funds were used to make substantial investments in real estate and his business activities, thereby integrating the proceeds of crime into the legitimate economy and projecting them as untainted assets. 135. At this juncture it requires to refer herein that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rohit Tandon vs. 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Section 3 of the Act makes a person guilty of the offence of money laundering, if he (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 indire....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. The explanation clarifies that the proceeds of crime include property, not only derived or obtained from 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 (u) also clarifies that even the value of any such property will also be the proceeds of crime. 143. Now coming to the contentions as raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, wherein, he has taken the ground that the petitioner is not accused in the predicate offence, hence, cannot be made liable for money laundering offence. But the contention of the learned counsel appears to be misplaced reason being that it is settled proposition of law that the offence of money Laundering is independent of the scheduled offence, particularly in matters related to the proceeds of crime. 144. It is evident that as per Section 3, there are six processes or activities identified therein. They are, (i) concealment; (ii) possession; (iii) acquisition; (iv) use; (v) projecting as untainted property; and (vi) claiming as untainted property. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al Choudhary (supra). Further, in Rohit Tandon v. Directorate of Enforcement, (2018) 11 SCC 46, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has also observed that the provisions of section 24 of the PMLA provide 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. 149. Further, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Directorate has merely relied upon the information from the predicate agency (DGGI) to justify the arrest is incorrect and misleading. The Directorate has independently collected, analyzed, and evaluated the material forming the basis for the arrest. The Petitioner's conduct, as revealed during the investigation including his financial linkages, involvement in key entities like TE Udhyog Pvt. Ltd. and Greentech Traders, handling of large- scale ITC flows, and statements of dummy persons coerced by him demonstrate not only his active role in laundering the proceeds of crime but also his tendency to interfere with the investigation and key witnesses 150. The involvement of the Petitioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....but this Court after going through the prosecution report has found that other witnesses who have not been arrayed as an accused in their statements recorded under section 50 of the PML Act have made specific imputation against the petitioner. 156. Further herein, it is evident from the various paragraphs of the prosecution complaint filed which have been referred hereinabove, is supported by substantial evidence gathered during the investigation and culpability against the petitioner is not based solely upon on the statements of the petitioner and his accomplices. Furthermore, prima facie there is ample evidence establishing the petitioner's involvement in the offence of money laundering, which is further corroborated by statements of other witnesses who were not arraigned as accused in the instant case. Further, the petitioner's role has already been discussed herein in detail in the preceding paragraphs, therefore, the averments of the petitioner are unfounded and liable to be dismissed. 157. It needs to refer herein that 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 witnesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n judicial custody since 2-1-2017 and has not been interrogated or examined by the Enforcement Directorate thereafter; all these will be of no consequence." 158. In a recent judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Abhishek Banerjee & Anr. v. Directorate of Enforcement", (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 Constituti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....panies and proxy accounts. The role of the Petitioner is not based merely on statements but is fortified by the recovery of incriminating digital documents during the course of searches conducted on 08.05.2025. 163. The reliance placed on Prem Prakash v. Union of India (supra) is misplaced. The observations therein pertain to co-accused statements under Section 30 of the Evidence Act and are not intended to override the admissibility of statements under Section 50 of PMLA in the unique statutory scheme of the PMLA. In fact, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has recognized the evidentiary sanctity of Section 50 in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929, affirming that such statements are legally distinct from statements to police under the Evidence Act. 164. Thus, the petitioner knowingly is as 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. 165. Having examined the admissibility of statements recorded under Section 50 of the PML Act, 2002, this Court shall now proceed to analyze the statutory framework g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rst, that the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence has been committed. Second, that the property in question has been derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of that criminal activity. Third, the person concerned is, directly or indirectly, involved in any process or activity connected with the said property being proceeds of crime. On establishing the fact that there existed proceeds of crime and the person concerned was involved in any process or activity connected therewith, itself, constitutes offence of money- laundering. The nature of process or activity has now been elaborated in the form of Explanation inserted vide Finance (No. 2) Act, 2019. On establishing these foundational facts in terms of Section 24 of the 2002 Act, a legal presumption would arise that such proceeds of crime 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." 170. Be it noted that the legal presumption ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iged to prove them as part of its primary burden. ... 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, which coupled with the presumptive evidence adduced by the prosecution or the Department would rebut the initial presumption of innocence in favour of that person, and in the result, prove him guilty." 174. Thus, in light of the aforesaid principles and the law enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (Supra), this Court must determine whether the foundational facts necessary to invoke the presumption under Section 24 of the PML Act, 2002 have been established by the respondent/ED. 175. Herein as per the prosecution complaint which has been annexed herein as annexure, it is evident that there is ample evidence has been led by the prosecuting agency in order to fix the culpability of the present petitioner, therefore the scope of section 24 of Act 2002 has pivotal role at this stage. 176. Now in the light of aforesaid discussion at this juncture, this Court thinks it fit ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....offence while on bail. Recently, in Tarun Kumar v Assistant Directorate of Enforcement, (supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held 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 that the accused is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. It 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." 181. Further, at the stage of recording statements during enqui....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with the offences under UAP Act 1967, in the case of Gurwinder Singh v. State of Punjab (supra) and taking in to consideration the ratio of judgment of Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb, (2021) 3 SCC 713 has observed 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, for ready reference the relevant paragraph is being quoted as under: "46. As already discussed, the material available on record indicates the involvement of the appellant in furtherance of terrorist activities backed by members of banned terrorist organisation involving exchange of large quantum of money through different channels which needs to be deciphered and therefore in such a scenario if the appellant is released on bail there is every likelihood that he will influence the key witnesses of the case which might hamper the process of justice. Therefore, mere delay in trial pertaining to grave offences as one involved in the instant case cannot be used as a ground to grant bail. Hence, the aforesaid argument on behalf of the appellant cannot be accepted." 188. Thus, on the basis of the aforesaid settled position of law it is evident t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 Central Bureau of Investigation", 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." 195. Similarly, the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of "Nimmagadda Prasad Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation", reported in (2013) 7 SCC 466 has reiterated the same view in paragraphs-23 to 25 which reads as under: "23. Unfortunately, in the last few years, the country has been seeing an alarming rise in white-collar crimes, which has affected the fibre of the country's economic structure. Incontrovertibly, economic offences have serious repercus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e country." 196. 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." 197. It requires to refer herein that the Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of judgments has held that 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 d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e 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 ensuring the right of speedy trial guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. 24. With the afore-stated observations, the appeal is dismissed." 199. This Court, considering the aforesaid material available against the petitioner quoted....