TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1454
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is contended that in the predicate offences i.e. in the FIR No.298/2021 registered at Police Station Balghat, Karauli and FIR No.402/2021 registered at Police Station Ganga City, the same allegations were incorporated and subsequently charge-sheet have been submitted. As far as the investigation of the predicate offence is concerned, the Investigating Agency has arrested as many as 130 accused persons and have submitted 9 chargesheets. The allegations as culled out against the petitioner are that Ramkripal Meena in connivance with Pradeep Parashar and Udaram Bishnoi hatched a criminal conspiracy to leak paper and Ramkripal Meena made a deal with Udaram Bishnoi and with the present petitioner to provide them the Rajasthan Eligibility Examination for Teachers ("REET") exam paper. The main allegations of stealing the papers and receiving huge amount are against Ramkripal Meena and Udaram Bishnoi. The allegation that accused gave Rs. 43,00,000/- in cash to Ramkripal Meena and amount of Rs.80,00,000/- is without any tenable proof. It is also contended that the statement recorded under Section 50 of the P.M.L.A. is not admissible. It is also argued that the criminal antecedents shown aga....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....raight forward open and shut cases, this Court is flooded with huge number of bail petitions thereby adding to the huge pendency. It is high time that the trial Courts and the High Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is rule and Jail is exception". 5. The Hon'ble Apex Court also after referring the judgment of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (2024) 9 SCC 813, Gudikanti Narasimhule & Ors. Vs. Public Prosecutor High Court of Andrapradesh, 1978 (1) SC 240, observed that; "if the State or any prosecuting agency including the Court concerned has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that crime committed is serious. Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime". 6. After considering the entire judgmentory law, the Court allowed the bail application of Manish Sisodia, citing that the case involves thousands of pages of documents, having 493 witnesses and there is no remotest possibility of the trial being c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the petitioner being a syndicate of the planned crime, facilitated the examinee with the leaked question papers. The investigation has clearly revealed that the present petitioner Rajaram @ Iram being one of the conspirator for leaking the REET 2021 paper along with Udaram Bishnoi. The petitioner entered into a deal of Rs.5,00,00,000/- with Ram Kripal Meena and handed over him Rs. 43,00,000/- as an advance. During the investigation Rajuram @ Iram accepted forwarding and making arrangement for tutoring the leaked paper. The petitioner-Rajuram @ Iram also accepted that he made a deal of forwarding/tutoring/showing the leaked paper to various candidates in exchange for Rs.10,00,000/- from each candidate. The petitioner could not receive the said amount as the entire matter was disclosed & REET paper 2021 stands cancelled. Thus, the petitioner has knowingly assisted in the process connected with the proceeds of crime, like concealment, possession, acquisition, used and transferred of the proceeds of crime and production of the same as untainted. 9. It is vehemently argued that the provision of Section 45 of the P.M.L.A. are mandatory and the Court must deny the bail until determine ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Rohit Tandon Vs. Directorate of Enforcement (Supra) and Tarun Kumar Vs. Assistant Director Enforcement Directorate (Supra), have categorically held that "the statements of witnesses/accused are admissible in evidence and such statements may make out a formidable case about the involvement of the accused in the commission of a serious offence of money laundering". The law cited by learned counsel for the petitioner in the case of Prem Prakash (supra) is entirely different, as in that case the statements recorded under Section 50 of the P.M.L.A. and other case were taken into consideration and to that aspect the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "any statement under Section 50 of the P.M.L.A., made to the same investigating agency is inadmissible against the maker". Therefore, the law cited by learned counsel for the petitioner on facts is entirely different. 18. Section 45(1)(ii) further enumerates that; "no person accused of an offence shall be released on bail or his bond unless the Court is satisfied that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail". This Court is not satisfied that the petitioner will not commit any of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ifferent from the present case. In the present case the Department has prima facie able to show that the petitioner was involved in money laundering offence and the petitioner provided the leaked paper to the other examinee in lieu of Rs.10,00,000/- each and as a part payment also paid Rs.43,00,000/- to the main accused Ramkripal Meena. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari the matter pertains to offence committed under Section 302 read with Section 120-B of IPC, whereas the present matter pertains to offence committed under Section 3/4 of the P.M.L.A. Act. Similarly, in the matter of Maulana Mohammed Amir Rashid (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court enlarged the accused on bail and observed that the role of the accused in that case was not established, therefore, despite the criminal antecedents, the Court enlarged the accused on bail. In the case of Taket Jerang (supra) the Hon'ble Apex Court granted bail to the accused, despite there been evidence that the accused is involved in 92 other cases of similar nature, although in that case the facts are not being mentioned. However, in the present case the role of the accused is being pointely mentioned and prima facie established by the ....