TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1224
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gistered by the CBI, IOC, New Delhi, initially against unknown persons for offences punishable under Sections 120-B read with Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act. The FIR relates to an organized tech-support fraud in which US national were allegedly defrauded of approximately US$15 million during the period from November 2022 to April 2024. The accused persons allegedly operated illegal call centres from Delhi and adjoining areas, impersonated employees of reputed organizations such as Microsoft and Amazon and induced foreign victims to provide remote access to their computers and thereafter to transfer money to the bank accounts on the false representation that their system(s) were compromised and their funds needed to be protected from hackers by transferring them to bank account(s) purportedly managed by Federal Reserve. One of the instances referred to in the investigation is related to a US national who was allegedly induced to transfer approximately US$6.5 million, which was thereafter routed through various bank accounts maintained in Hong Kong. Similar transactions involving other foreign victims were also allegedly detec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on the instructions of the petitioner and were thereafter routed through shell companies into the accounts of the petitioner and other accused persons. The prosecution has alleged that the petitioner was actively involved in the layering of proceeds of crime and was one of the principal beneficiaries thereof and thereby committed the offence of money laundering punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner; led by Shri. Vikram Chaudhri, Senior Advocate; has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated as there is no material connecting him with the alleged shell companies or the IP addresses used in the commission of the scheduled offence. Learned senior counsel has iterated that merely because the petitioner is living a luxurious lifestyle or because certain credits are reflected in his bank account, the same cannot be said to constitute money laundering. According to learned senior counsel, the petitioner has disclosed his assets and expenditures in his Income Tax Returns and, if there is any discrepancy in his declared income, the appropriate proceedings would lie before the Income Tax Department. It has been further contended ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded that the petitioner has directly received substantial amounts from M/s CSPRO Technology (OPC) Pvt. Ltd and co-accused Chandra Prakash Gupta and huge amounts have been routed to him through shell companies. The relevant part of the reply reads thus: "III. PMLA INVESTIGATION AND THE ROLE OF THE PETITIONER - ABHINAV KALRA (A) Modus Operandi of the Syndicate 11. That the syndicate executed the fraud through a well-planned and organised modus operandi. It deployed fake pop-up alerts falsely claiming to be from Microsoft, prompting unsuspecting victims to call VoIP-based support numbers; the callers were then deceived by individuals posing as Microsoft technical support personnel, who persuaded them to install remote access software such as TeamViewer or AnyDesk; once access was obtained, the victims were falsely informed that their computers and personal identities stood compromised; and, exploiting the fear and urgency so created, the syndicate induced the victims to transfer their funds to bank accounts purportedly maintained by the Federal Reserve. The operation functioned through a structured hierarchy comprising Openers/Agents, Bankers, Supervisors....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arious premises connected with the case, including on 1920.08.2025 and 19-20.12.2025 at the residential premises of the Petitioner at G-173, Palam Vihar, Gurugram, which is a modern luxury house built on a plot admeasuring approximately 1,000 square yards. The search at the Petitioner's premises resulted in the recovery and seizure of four high-end motor vehicles (Rover Rover Sport, Mini Cooper, Mercedes S-450 and BMW 740i) and eight luxury Wrist watches of brands including Rolex, Chopard, Hublot, Cartier, Franck Muller, Patek Philippe and Bvlgari. Across the search operations, incriminating documentary and digital records were seized, more than 30 bank accounts with balances of Rs. 5.68 Crores were frozen, 12 luxury cars, high-end watches and jewellery were seized, and assets exceeding Rs. 100 Crores acquired from proceeds of crime, wholly disproportionate with the financial profiles of the accused, were identified. (D) Statements under Section 50 PMLA establishing the Petitioner as a Main Mastermind 16. That statements of numerous employees and associates of M/s CSPRO and M/s Innonet recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA, including that of Sh. Abhishek Bist ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l call centre was operated, and Rs. 80,56,500/- from Sh. Chandra Prakash Gupta, its Director and 100% shareholder, in his ICICI Bank account, which establishes a direct and unexplained financial nexus between the Petitioner and the very source of the proceeds of crime. 20. That analysis of the Petitioner's ICICI Bank account No. 091001001644 revealed a spurt of huge credits aggregating to approximately Rs. 47.81 Crores during 2021 to 2024, with corresponding debits of Rs. 47.79 Crores. The debits include, inter alia Rs. 5.74 Crores to M/s Kapoor Watch and Company (luxury watches); Rs. 3.43 Crores to his wife, Smt. Radhika Kabra; Rs. 2.66 Crores to M/s Mrid Info Solutions and Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (a company controlled and managed by the Petitioner and his wife); Rs. 2.57 Crores to Bawa Kapoor; and Rs. 2.51 Crores to Horizon BPO. As against this, the Income Tax Returns filed by the Petitioner for Financial Years 2019-20 to 2023-24 disclose an aggregate income of merely Rs. 1.04 Crores against a cumulative turnover of only Rs. 4.31 Crores, tabulated as under: Financial Year Head-wise Income Turnover (Rs.) Income Reported (Rs.) 2019-20 Income from Business....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ajay Traders, Eaglesharp Solutions, Shree Balaji Trading, Adira Trading, Abinox Trading Co. and others) in its IDFC First Bank account No.10102293372, all of which are accommodation-entry providers. Accommodation entries to the tune of Rs. 25.19 Crores are attributable to the Petitioner and his related company out of a total of Rs. 111.19 Crores routed through such shell entities in this case. (F) Evasive and Shifting Explanations of the Petitioner 24. That, when confronted during his statements, the Petitioner has given mutually inconsistent and evasive explanations. He first claimed that the credits were "unsecured loans" from entities connected with his companies; however, the balance sheet of M/s Mrid Info Solutions and Marketing Pvt. Ltd. reflects the very same sums as "advances towards property", the purported loans were never repaid, and the purported lender entities are non-existent/shell entities. Thereafter, in his statement dated 31.10.2025, he categorically stated that the entire amount was in fact his own money received on account of "consultancy work"; yet, when called upon to disclose the nature of such consultancy or to identify even a single enti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n mastermind of the scam, quantifies the proceeds of crime attributable to him, and records the issuance of nonbailable warrants against him." Raising submissions in tandem with the aforesaid reply, learned senior counsel appearing for the ED has iterated that the investigation has revealed substantial incriminating material connecting the petitioner with the alleged scam. According to learned senior counsel for the ED, the prosecution has relied upon statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA alleging that the petitioner was involved in routing substantial amounts through shell entities and hawala channels. Furthermore, the petitioner has the knowledge regarding the source of the proceeds of crime, the persons involved, the beneficiaries therein, as well as the details of the overseas routing of funds and, therefore, the custodial interrogation is necessary for completing the investigation effectively. Accordingly, a prayer has been made for the dismissal of the instant petition in order to facilitate effective investigation into the alleged offence. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the rival parties and have gone through the available record of the case. 6. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate(s). On certain occasions, adjournments had been sought by the petitioner and on even on the subsequent date(s), he again failed to appear. Even after the search conducted at his house/premises, the petitioner did not appear pursuant to subsequent summons. The conduct of the petitioner, as reflectable from the reply filed by the ED, reflects that the petitioner was afforded repeated opportunities to join the investigation but he failed to appear on several dates despite service of summons. The relevant part of the reply filed by ED reads thus: "(1) Conduct of the Petitioner: Summons, Non-Compliance, Warrants, Proclamation 27. That in order to gather relevant information/evidence and to take the investigation further, multiple summons under Section 50 of the PMLA, 2002 were issued to the Petitioner; however, he repeatedly failed to comply. The details of the summons and their (non-)compliance are tabulated as under: S.No. Date of Summons Date of Appearance Appeared/Not Appeared Remarks 1. 27.08.2025 28.08.2025 Not Appeared -- 2. 08.10.2025 13.10.2025 Not Appeared -- 3. 24.10.2025 27.10.2025 Appeared ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2023 read with Section 65 of the PMLA, 2002, and the Ld. Special Court, after due application of mind and by a detailed order dated 27.01.2026, issued non-bailable warrants against the Petitioner, returnable on 05.03.2026. The authorised officer of the Respondent Directorate attempted execution of the warrants at the Petitioner's residence on 16.02.2026 and 23.02.2026; on both dates the Petitioner was not found available, and the warrants were affixed at his address by way of chaspa in the presence of two independent panchas. The assistance of the Haryana Police was also sought vide letters dated 24.02.2026 addressed to the Deputy Commissioners of Police (East) and (West), Gurugram. The Petitioner thus absconded and concealed himself so that the warrants could not be executed. 30. That the Petitioner assailed the order dated 27.01.2026 before this Hon'ble Court in CRM-M-12823-2026, wherein, on the express statement of his counsel that the Petitioner was "ready and willing to join the proceedings before the Enforcement Directorate immediately", this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated 09.03.2026, stayed the operation of the impugned order subject to the Petitioner j....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as also not been supported by any reliable/cogent document(s)/material. The petitioner cannot claim the benefit of his earlier appearances alone when the material on record indicates that the investigation remained incomplete on account of his subsequent non-appearance/non-cooperation. In the considered opinion of this Court, the joining of the investigation earlier by the petitioner on a few occasions does not, by itself, establish complete cooperation; particularly when the Investigating Agency has stated that the statement of the petitioner remained incomplete and important question(s) relating to the financial trail and the source of funds remained unanswered. The conduct of the petitioner, as emerging from the reply of the ED, raises serious apprehension that he has not fully cooperated with the investigating agency which cannot be ignored while considering the plea for grant of anticipatory bail. 8. The nature of the accusations and the role attributed to the petitioner necessitate deeper probe and the same cannot be adjudicated conclusively at this juncture. In the considered opinion of this Court, while dealing with a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, this Court is no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ipatory bail. There may be many cases in which the custodial interrogation of the accused may not be required, but that does not mean that the prima facie case against the accused should be ignored or overlooked and he should be granted anticipatory bail. The first and foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail application should consider is the prima facie case put up against the accused. Thereafter, the nature of the offence should be looked into along with the severity of the punishment. Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline anticipatory bail. However, even if custodial interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail." 9. It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interests. The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. At this stage, there is no material on record....