TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1894
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No. 0011, dated 14.01.2021, registered under Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC at Police Station Sushant Lok, Gurugram. 2. As per allegations in the FIR, M/s Sai Aaina Farms Pvt. Ltd. (SAFPL), presently known as M/s Mahira Infratech Pvt. Ltd., is controlled by the Chhoker family, led by petitioner Dharam Singh Chhoker and his sons Sikander Singh and Vikas Chhoker. The companies of Chhoker family are known by the name of Mahira Group. SAFPL is one of the several companies under the Mahira Group. It undertook the project of building flats at Sector 68, Gurugram, under the affordable group housing project and applied for relevant license/permission to the Department of Town and Country Planning (DTCP), which issued license no.106/2017 to it in 2017 based on the documents/bank guarantees provided. The license was to build around 1500 flats in about ten acres of land; the project was to be completed by 2021-22. After obtaining license, the SAFPL started the bookings and collected around Rs.363 crores from 1500 home buyers. Despite receiving substantial part of payments from the home buyers, the construction work remained too slow to meet the promised deadlines. There wer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Dharam Singh Chhoker was/is the director in the below mentioned companies for the time period mentioned below: Sr. No. Company Name Designation Date of Appointment at Current Designation Date of cessation (if applicable) 1 DS Estates & Construction Private Limited Director 02.07.2007 30.09.2009 2 Mahira Homes Private Limited Director 17.11.2016 15.11.2017 3 DS Homes Construction Private Limited Director 31.08.2012 15.03.2017 Director 02.12.2019 10.07.2021 4 DSC Estate Developers Private Limited Director 03.11.2010 18.12.2014 5 DS Homes Private Limited Director 04.06.2020 10.07.2021 6 Mahira Buildtech Private Limited Director 17.11.2016 19.04.2018 81. The above-mentioned companies are the associate concerns of Mahira Group. M/s Mahira Homes Pvt Ltd is the holding company of all the project companies i.e. being developed by M/s Sai Aaina Farms Pvt Ltd, M/s Mahira Buildtech Pvt Ltd and M/s Mahira Buildwell Pvt Ltd. which are developing the projects at Sector 68, Sector 103 and Sector 104 of Gurugram, respectively. 82. It is further pertinent to mention h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder section 16 of PMLA, 2002 on 26.07.2023. 86. Further, during the custodial interrogation, Shri Dharam Singh Chhoker was confronted with Shri Sandeep Narang (director of M/s Hazoorilal Jewellers Pvt Ltd), wherein Shri Sandeep Narang stated that Shri Dharam Singh Chhoker came to his shop for buying the jewellery and in this regard Shri Sandeep Narang also submitted the invoices to that effect. 87. It is pertinent to mention herein that the bogus purchases were done to the tune of Rs. 56 Crore (approx.) by M/s Sai Aaina Farms Pvt Ltd and M/s D S Home Construction Pvt Ltd after receiving the payments from home buyers for Project Mahira Homes 68, Gurugram. Wherein the payments were transferred to the entities through banking transactions and further cash amount were received back by Chhoker family. The cash amounts received by the Chhoker families in lieu of the bogus billings, were utilized for their cash expenses as evident in the excel file "cement vendor2" retrieved from the laptop (make Dell, Model-P87G, SN-GF42902) which was seized at S. No. B-17 of RUD B to the panchnama drawn during the search operation on 31.07.2023 at premises of 301, Third Floor, Global ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m Singh Chhoker appeared on 12.04.2024. 30.05.2024 Made efforts 2-3 times to execute the arrest warrant at his house. But not found. Made efforts 9-10 times to execute the arrest warrants but not found at his house, his village-Samalkha etc. 09.01.2025 Made efforts 2-3 times to execute the arrest warrant at his house. But not found. Made efforts 9-10 times to execute the arrest warrants but not found at his house, his village-Samalkha etc. 24.01.2025 Made efforts 2-3 times to execute the arrest warrant at his house. But not found. Made efforts 9-10 times to execute the arrest warrants but not found at his house, his village-Samalkha etc. 2.5. At that stage, a writ petition, CWP-25140-2024, was filed before this Court by one Virender Singh son of Bharat Singh Chhoker, who was aspiring to contest election to the Haryana Legislative Assembly from the constituency from where the petitioner had contested, seeking the latter's arrest. The petition was allowed by the Division Bench vide judgment and order dated 23.10.2024, by directing as under: 35. For all the above stated reasons, this Court finds merit i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d before passing the order which violated the mandate of Section 223(1) BNSS. The petition was allowed by this Court vide judgment dated 29.07.2025 with the following directions: 9. In view thereof, the impugned orders, dated 22.11.2024 and 05.12.2024, are set aside directing the Special Judge under the PMLA to pass a fresh order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in terms of first proviso to Section 223(1) BNSS, within a period of eight weeks of receiving a certified copy of this order. In compliance thereof, the Special Judge afforded opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and was asked to address arguments. However, as apparent from the order dated 04.09.2025, the arguments were not advanced on the ground that one of the Compact Discs (CDs) furnished to the petitioner was blank and did not contain any document; a complete copy of the documents was therefore asked for by him. The request was opposed by the Special Public Prosecutor on the ground that all the documents had been duly handed over to the petitioner's counsel; the said CD was also given to him on 19.08.2025 but no objection was raised at that time. However, the Special Judge orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns and two companies, it relies upon 31 witnesses and 154 documents running into thousands of pages. The supplementary prosecution complaint has been filed on 01.07.2025 against seven individuals, including the petitioner, and three companies; there are 22 other prosecution witnesses and 302 documents running into more than four thousand pages have been relied upon. In total, there are 53 witnesses who are to be examined. Besides, the order passed by the Special Judge taking cognizance of the offence, dated 05.12.2024, was set aside by this Court vide judgment dated 29.07.2025, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after affording pre-cognizance hearing to the petitioner. Thereupon, the cognizance has been taken vide order dated 08.01.2026, but the same is also under challenge before this Court. Accordingly, there is no possibility of the trial commencing for quite some time. These facts entitle the petitioner to be released on bail. Strong reliance has been placed on law laid down in V. Senthil Balaji v. Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 SCC Online SC 2626, to contend that the petitioner's long incarceration violates his Fundamental Right to life. Lea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d could be apprehended with great difficulty. There is every likelihood that on being released on bail, he would disappear to avoid the process of law. Fourthly, it cannot be said that trial will take long time to conclude as there are only two prosecution complaints with actually 48 witnesses, since 5 of the total 53 witnesses cited in both the complaints are common; 07 of these are officials, and there is likelihood that 5 of the witnesses can be dropped by the ED. Besides, it is the petitioner who is delaying the commencement of trial. Initially, cognizance of the offence was taken on 05.12.2024, which was challenged before this Court, and the order was set aside on 29.07.2025. Despite a clear direction by the Court to pass a fresh order regarding cognizance within two months, the petitioner kept on delaying the hearing on cooked-up grounds. Finally, the cognizance was again taken by the Special Judge on 08.01.2026, which was again challenged by him before this Court. However, there is no stay on further proceedings, and the trial can proceed which will soon be concluded. In these circumstances, the period of delay in taking the cognizance needs to be excluded from the total per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice and security staff of the hotel from where he was arrested. Keeping these facts in view, no exception can be taken to the assertion by the ED that he is a flight risk. 7. Still further, it cannot be lost sight of that the initial order of learned Special Judge taking cognizance of the offence, dated 05.12.2024, was set aside by this Court vide judgment dated 29.07.2025, accepting the petition filed by co-accused Sikander Singh. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration, and the learned Judge could finally hear and decide the issue vide order dated 08.01.2026, taking cognizance of the offence again. The trial is now set to commence and there is no foreseeable hindrance to it. The period of petitioner's incarceration cannot be viewed in isolation, and has to be seen in the light of circumstances whereunder the order taking cognizance has been passed by the learned Judge, as detailed in paragraph 2.9 above. Accordingly, it is not a case that delay in commencement of trial can be attributed to the ED; instead, the indication is otherwise. Besides, looking at the number of complaints - 2, number of accused - 15, as also the number of witnesses - 48, of whom five may be drop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....more than 2000 accused persons will have to be heard. There are bound to be further proceedings arising out of orders on charge. After that, more than 600 witnesses will have to be examined. Documentary and electronic evidence is relied upon in the scheduled offences. Even if few witnesses are dropped, a few hundred witnesses will have to be examined. Presence of all the accused will have to be procured and their statements under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 will have to be recorded. Therefore, even in ideal conditions, the possibility of the trial of scheduled offences concluding even within a reasonable time of three to four years appears to be completely ruled out. 18 to 28 xxx xxx 29. As stated earlier, the appellant has been incarcerated for 15 months or more for the offence punishable under the PMLA. In the facts of the case, the trial of the scheduled offences and, consequently, the PMLA offence is not likely to be completed in three to four years or even more. If the appellant's detention is continued, it will amount to an infringement of his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India of speedy trial. No doub....