TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 1676
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss violation of the fundamental rights of the Petitioner guaranteed under Article 14, 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India in relation to ECIR/RPZO/04/2024 registered by the Respondent Agency and quash the same and direct that the Petitioner to be released on bail; ii. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside and quash the Order dated 08.08.2024 passed by the Ld. Spl. Judge (PMLA), Raipur, Chhattisgarh granting 6 days of ED custody remand of the Petitioner from 08.08.2024 till 14.08.2024 in relation to ECIR/RPZO/04/2024 registered by the Respondent Agency; iii. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside and quash all subsequent remand Orders that may be passed; iv. This Hon'bl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t filed by the ED in relation to the 1" ECIR was ultimately quashed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court with a finding that there were no proceeds of crime and no scheduled offence in relation to the 1st ECIR. 3. The 2nd ECIR is predicated upon an FIR bearing No. 04/2024 dated 17.01.2024 registered by ACB, Raipur ("Chhattisgarh FIR") pursuant to a letter dated 11.07.2023 sent by the ED during the course of the illegal proceedings in the 1st ECIR. The petitioner has been granted regular bail in relation to the Chhattisgarh FIR inter alia on the ground that the Chhattisgarh FIR emanates out of quashed proceedings. The Chhattisgarh FIR is completely illegal and liable to be quashed. ED had also caused the registration of another illegal FIR be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....B, Raipur. There is no reason that the ED could not have interrogated the petitioner again while he was in custody of the UP Police. Further, the ED had also sought permission of the Special Judge (PC Act), Raipur to arrest the petitioner while he was in judicial custody in relation to the Chhattisgarh FIR prior to the filing of the Prosecution Complaint in the 2nd ECIR on 19.06.2024. 6. Under PMLA, arrest can only be sought upon the officer having reasons to believe that the accused is guilty of the offence of money laundering. Thus, it appears that as on 14.06.2024 when the permission to arrest the petitioner was sought by the ED, the officers of the ED were of the opinion that the petitioner is guilty of the offence of money-launderin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on the same and realising that the bail granted by this Hon'ble Court to the petitioner in relation to the Chhattisgarh FIR will also extend to the UP FIR in terms of law, the ED caused the issuance of the production warrants to prolong the custody of the petitioner. All the investigating agencies have been adopting the utmost mala fide modus operandi where all attempts have been made to somehow curtail and frustrate the rights of the petitioner. Arrest of the petitioner has been effected immediately upon the petitioner availing his legal remedies or his co-accused getting protection in the proceedings. This is being done to frustrate his rights and to prolong his pre-trial incarceration. The same is violative of the fundamental rights....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed. 12.We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 13. From perusal of the pleadings, it transpires that the relief which the petitioner had sought in Cr. M.P. No. 1186/2024 {Anwar Dhebar v. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement} is identical to that of the reliefs sought in this petition. The only additional reliefs which the petitioner seeks is in this petition is quashing of the order dated 08.08.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, PMLA, Raipur by which the ED has been granted custody of the petitioner for six days. 14. It would be beneficial to quote the reliefs which were sought by the petitioner in his earlier petition being Cr. M.P. No. 1186/2024 which r....