TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1736
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Pradeep Kumar and Ors. have been charged for indulging in criminal conspiracy, cheating, dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery of valuable security, will, etc. using as genuine a forged document or electronic record and criminal misconduct by a public servant and thereby causing huge loss to the government exchequer. Vide charge-sheet No. 5/2011 dated 10.08.2011, it has been alleged by the CBI, Ranchi that Rs. 31.68 Crores were squandered out of N.R.H.M. Funds by the public servants namely Sri Bhanu Pratap Shahi, Dr. Pradeep Kumar, Dr. Vijay Shankar Narayan Singh, Sri Madan Mohan Prasad, Sri Pradyut Mukherjee and others in collusion with private persons namely Sri Nandlal Kishore Fogla, Sri Rajesh Fogla and Sri Shyamal Chakravarty (appellant herein) and others. Dr. Pradeep Kumar being the mission director functioned as Chief Executive Officer, Jharkhand Rural Health Mission Society, during the period from 20.06.2008 to 03.08.2009 and while functioning, as such, he was directly responsible for any omission and commission. CBI Investigation of the case has established that Sri Bhanu Pratap Shahi entered into criminal conspiracy with Dr. Pradeep Kumar, Dr. Vijay Shan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wn source of income. He had acquired assets either in his own name or in the name of his dependent family members. Dr. Pradeep Kumar formed Pradeep Kumar HUF and Nand Lal HUF and started filing separate IT Returns for the HUFs from the FY 2004-05. Further, Dr. Pradeep Kumar vide sale deed No. 2668 dated 31.01.2005 sold a flat at Rajouri Garden, Delhi for Rs. 17 lacs, and subsequently opened a Capital Gain account showing sale proceeds to be Rs. 20.20 lacs. Investigation also revealed that attached immovable properties namely (i) 1A, 1st Floor, Sugam Hemant Apartment, 75 Bondel Road, Kolkata-700019 purchased through registered sale deed 9786 dated 31.08.2009 area 1569 Sq. Ft. total consideration amount with stamp duty and registration Rs. 42,28,764/- (ii) a car-parking space No. 12 in Apartment, 75 Bondel Road, Kolkata vide sale deed No. 9793 dated 11.09.2009 by HUF-D-3 total value including stamp duty and registration Rs. 70,575/- were purchased by Dr. Pradeep Kumar in his own name and in the name of Nand Lal HUF (Karta Rajendra Kumar), in the name of his brother Rajendra Kumar and Shyamal Chakraborty (present appellant) from the proceeds of crime which source of acquisition is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ge-sheets has been filed by the CBI Ranchi against the concerned accused persons i.e. (i). Charge-sheet No. 05/2011 dated 10.08.2011 of Central Bureau of Investigation, SPE, AHD, Ranchi filed before the Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi for the offences under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC and Section 13(1)(c), 13(1(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; (ii) Charge-sheet No. 06/2011 dated 05.09.2011 of Central Bureau of Investigation, SPE, AHD, Ranchi filed before the Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi for the offences under Sections 120B, 420, 477A of the IPC and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988; (iii) Charge-sheet No. 12/2013 dated 31.08.2013 of Central Bureau of Investigation, ACB, Ranchi filed for the offence under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 read with Section 109 of the IPC. The name of appellant Shyamal Chakravarty did not find place in charge-sheet No. 12/2013 dated 31.08.2013 (in FIR No. RC-01(A)/2011-R dated 03.01.2011) filed before the Court of Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi. Whereas the name of Dr. Pradeep Kumar, Rajend....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3.2011. It is further argued that the learned appellate tribunal has wrongly held that the payment made to the developer M/s Ashicon Housing Pvt. Ltd. by the purchaser Arun Kumar Agarwal as the proceeds of alleged crime of the appellant and other accused persons observing that said payment was made in the year 2006-07 by the present appellant Shyamal Chakravarty and Nand Lal HUF whereas the payment to the developer and owner of Arun Kumar Agarwal was made in the year 2006-07 by availing loan facility and payment by Shyamal Chakravarty and Nand Lal HUF was made by Arun Kumar Agarwal as per payments. The learned trial court further failed to consider that Mr. Arun Kumar Agarwal (purchaser) has from time to time made payment of various amount towards the said consideration amount and has also caused payments of various amounts from the Union Bank of India by obtaining loan facilities from the said Bank and the said purchaser has until the date made and caused by the banker to be made payment of total sum of Rs. 38,58,700/- towards the consideration amount of flat. The agreement to sale dated 03.08.2009 itself shows that the purchaser was handed over possession of the property on 08.10....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sting Dr. Pradeep Kumar in laundering the proceeds of crime. It is further submitted that both Dr. Pradeep Kumar and Rajendra Kumar could not submit any evidence regarding source for creation of IVPS and KVPs which formed the basis for formation of Nand Lal HUF. This shows that proceeds of crime generated by Dr. Pradeep Kumar were invested in Nand Lal HUF which was formed on the advice of his Chartered Accountant Naresh Kejriwal for the only purpose of concealment and layering of proceeds of crime so that tainted property could be projected as untainted. It is further submitted that that accused Rajendra Kumar in his statement has stated that he took loan from Sitaram Pathak and Inderlal Kejriwal for acquisition of immovable property, but he could not produce any loan agreement and also failed to personally know the above persons. Moreover, all the payment for acquisition of this immovable property had already been done much prior to receipt of the loans. These loans have not been reflected in the books of account. Both Sitaram Pathak and Inderlal Kejriwal transferred the amount to the bank account of Rajendra Kumar on the advice of CA Naresh Kejriwal. It is further submitted that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....HUF despite being Karta of the said Nand Lal HUF. He has expressed his ignorance about the basic details regarding this HUF. This fact itself reflects that Rajendra Kumar is a dummy Karta of the said HUF and the proceeds of the crime generated by Dr. Pradeep Kumar could be laundered through this HUF. Rajendra Kumar has further stated that he is not aware of the details of the property in Kolkata, its price and the exact source of its acquisition rather stated about loan of approx. Rs. 20 Lacs taken from Pathak & Co. The details of loan and its repayment status is also not known to him. Rajendra Kumar has also stated that money was arranged by his brother Dr. Pradeep Kumar's C.A. Naresh Kejriwal but the loan has not been reflected in the ITR of Nand Lal HUF. It is further submitted that the adjudicating Authority under PMLA as well as learned Appellate Tribunal has rightly confirmed the provisional attachment order in respect of immovable property. The appellant is enjoying the privilege of bail granted in the aforesaid criminal case and the subject matter of dispute is still to be adjudicated during trial of the case. In view of the sufficient materials showing the properties provi....