Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + HC Money Laundering - 2016 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 907 - HC - Money LaunderingApplicants have prayed to release them on bail - offence punishable under Sections 3 read with Section 4 of the PMLA read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code - Held that:- . It appears that the applicants were involved in cricket betting and was setting the accounts with respect of the money generated out of cricket betting. It is an admitted position that cricket betting is not a scheduled offence and hence the money generated out of cricket betting does not come within the purview of the definition of proceeds of crime. In the present case, the scheduled offences are cheating and forgery and the conspiracy to commit the same with an object of procuring SIM Cards on the basis of false and forged documents. All the SIM Cards in the present case were recovered during the search conducted on the 19.03.2015 under Section 37 of the FEMA, 1999 and since the applicant herein was not present there at the time of search he has nothing to do with those SIM Cards. Even for the sake of argument if we believe that the contents of Case No.85 of 2015 are correct, then also what emerges out of the scheduled offences are the SIM Cards. That what was derived or obtained directly or indirectly were the SIM Cards, and as far as the usage of the SIM Cards are concerned, it is a separate offence and the same is not relied upon by the Enforcement Directorate. It is true that in the case of Ankush Bansal, whose bail order forms part of the bail application, this Hon’ble Court while admitting the bail in para No.10 have observed that money generated from cricket betting are not proceeds of crime. If this is the situation, then without there being any proceeds of crime the offences under Section 3 of PMLA is not made out against the present applicant herein and since no offence as such under the PMLA are made out against the applicant, hence, the applicability of Section 45 of the PMLA does not arise. A bare perusal of Section 45 of the PMLA shows that when the Courts are satisfied that there is a reasonable ground of believing that when the applicant is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, he can be granted bail. Since, in the present condition there are no proceeds of crime existing hence Section 3 of the PMLA does not arise. In view of above observation, I am of the opinion that present both the applications require consideration. Hence, both the applications are allowed and the applicants are ordered to be released on bail.
|