TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1121X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refore, directed that the petitioners be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond in the sum of ₹2 lakhs each with two sureties of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, further subject to the condition that the petitioners will not leave the country without the prior permission of the court concerned. - BAIL APPLN. 1113/2017 and Crl. M.A. No. 244/2018 & BAIL APPLN. 1114/2017 and Crl. M.A. No. 239/2018 - - - Dated:- 25-1-2018 - MS. MUKTA GUPTA J. Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Vikram Chaudhri, Sr.Advocate with Mr. Harshit Sethi, Mr. S.P. Singh, Mr. Rishi Sehgal and Mr. Nikhil Jain, Advocates. Respondent Represented by: Mr. Sanjeev Narula, CGSC, Mr. Amit Mahajan, CGSC, Mr. Nitesh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a batch of writ petitions and criminal appeals, the Hon ble Supreme Court declared the two further conditions imposed for release on bail in Section 45 (1) of PMLA to be unconstitutional, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and remanded back the matter to the respective Courts which denied the bail, to be heard on merits without application of the twin conditions mentioned in Section 45 of the PMLA. The petitioners, in the meantime also applied before the learned Special Judge, PMLA for grant of bail after passing of the order of the Supreme Court however, the same was declined vide order dated 8th December, 2017. Thus in both the petitions additional applications challenging the order dated 8th December, 2017 passe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed and both the orders of the Assessing Authority and CIT (Appeals) were set aside and the matter remanded back with directions to provide adequate opportunity to the petitioners after confronting them with the entire material. On remand the Commissioner, Income Tax (Appeals) held that the share capital received by M/s Jagat Projects was not in the nature of accommodation entries but genuine share application money invested by those 30 companies and shareholder companies had sufficient funds to invest in the shares of M/s Jagat Projects. Finding of the Assessing Officer that a commission of ₹1,16,46,000/- was paid for receiving the share capital was set aside. 7. Grievance of the petitioners is that despite the facts that the petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ime spend in the custody is not the sole criteria for grant of bail and reliance in this regard is placed on the decision reported as 2007 (216) ELT 673 Lalit Goel vs. Commissioner of Central Excise. Referring to the decision reported as 2013 (7) SCC 439 Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy vs. Central Bureau of Investigation it is contended that even after a span of one year in custody bail application was dismissed. Rajesh Aggarwal, the co-accused was a Chartered Accountant and was acting as a Mediator only. Thus the petitioners cannot claim parity with him. 10. As noted above, the Supreme Court vide judgment dated 23rd November, 2017 has struck down the twin conditions imposed by Section 45 (1) of PMLA. Thus the present applications for bai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation of huge credit and debit summations was made to the tune of ₹8171.66 crores and the whole process of circular flow of funds was conducted through rotational transactions in the accounts of NKS and other companies. This Court during the course of arguments repeatedly inquired from the learned counsel for the respondent that even if assuming there was rotation of entries to the tune of approximately 8,000 crores and since substantial investigation has been carried out, what was the financial stability of the companies and the amount available with the companies however, no clear figure could be given by learned counsel for the respondent. 13. It is not disputed by learned counsel for the respondent that a complaint and a supple ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve been granted bail, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioners. It is therefore, directed that the petitioners be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond in the sum of ₹2 lakhs each with two sureties of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court, further subject to the condition that the petitioners will not leave the country without the prior permission of the court concerned. In case of change of residential address the same will be duly informed to the court by way of an affidavit and in case the petitioners are found interfering in the process of further investigation or tampering with the evidence or violating the conditions imposed, the respondent will be at liberty to take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
