9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to remove the squamous carcinoma cell. So obviously his diagnosis as a patient of carcinoma which he had developed was prior to the rejection of his bail prayer vide order dated 28th September, 2018 of this Court. The petitioner has visited TATA Memorial Hospital, Mumbai for further check-up and various tests were held at Bellevue clinic, Kolkata during April, 2011. Then he was referred for chemotherapy at Amri Hospital, Kolkata. The accused was again referred to radiotherapy OPD at SSKM Hospital on 22.11.2016. Thus it is pointed out that the petitioner is suffering from different ailments and he has to take several medicines in a day but he has to take medicines supplied from the correctional home, which virtually deteriorated his physical condition. It is also submitted that the petitioner is suffering from Diabetes Mellitus and hypertension with IHD for which he was also admitted in PCH Hospital since 8th February, 2017 and has acute pain in his hip joint and lower leg and suffering from degenerative disc disease with secondary spinal canal steno sis at L4-L5. The petitioner is also said to have suffered from diseases of urinary organs and was referred to Institute of Psychia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... investigation has submitted charge sheet under Section 4 of the Act arraigning the petitioner as an accused in most arbitrary and mechanical manner without appreciating the materials collected in the course of investigation. The case of the petitioner is that he on his own surrendered before the learned Judge on 21st October, 2016, since then is in custody for two years and eleven months. The involvement of the petitioner in connection with this case is only based on a confessional statement of accused persons under Section 50 of the Act and while taking cognizance of the offence the learned Special Judge rejected the bail prayer of the petitioner and has committed an error in law and fact without appreciating the settled principle of law as the statement of co-accused persons is the weakest piece of evidence and the same cannot be the sole basis for curtailing the freedom of any citizen of the country for period until and unless the custodial interrogation of the persons is required for further investigation. It is also pointed out that close relations of Gautam Kundu, the Chairman of the Rose Valley Group of Company and the key person have not been implicated in the case. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndra Rai's case this Court finds that the accused was in custody for more than a year, in which case, the investigation was not yet completed whereas in the instant case this Court finds that though the petitioner was in custody for more than two years and eleven months but he is involved in chit fund scam by securing huge money from the public at large as revealed from the charge sheet submitted against the petitioner and eight other accused persons. Moreover, the case is set for trial upon framing of the charge. A report from the trial Court was called for and the Special Judge has submitted his report dated 28.11.2019 regarding M.L. Case No. 03 of 2015 and C 14214 of 2013 which reflects that the case was instituted in 2015 and by transfer from the Court of Chief Judge City Civil Court, the trial Court received the record on 19.07.2016. Since then bail petition of the accused persons were filed and were disposed by the Court time to time and lastly on 25.08.2017 the trial Court fixed the date for framing of charge and on the very date accused Ashok Kr. Saha also filed one discharge application on 08.09.2017. The accused Arun Mukherjee petitioner has also filed one bail applicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raming of charge. The learned trial Court can proceed to frame charge on the basis of charge-sheet after production of the accused persons in custody and to schedule the dates for expeditious trial. The learned Advocates who have filed the applications on behalf of the accused persons are also required to be disposed of prior to framing of the charge. Therefore, learned trial Court cannot be blamed for delay in trial rather the accused persons are delaying the trial of the case. On behalf of the E.D. Uttam Basak has objected to the ground for prayer of bail and has pointed out that the present petitioner being the Debenture Trustees of the company was responsible for the acts and daily affairs of the company at the relevant time and as per his plan and advice, the company designed illegal schemes to mobilise deposits from the innocent investors including the deposits under the scheme of issue of debentures with false assurance of high return and thereby generated huge sums of money for different purposes by making fool the common people. As per the provision of Section 45 of PMLA Act, 2002, and the notification of the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) being Notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he provision of Jail Code since there are so many Super Speciality Hospital in West Bengal as such Superintendent Presidency Correctional Home may be directed to arrange proper medical treatment of the accused. It would appear from the investigation report that the petitioner accused the Debenture Trustee member accused no. 1 was responsible for the acts and affairs of the company and at the relevant time he planned and designed the illegal schemes to mobilise deposits from the investors including deposits under the schemes of issue of debentures with false assurance of high return and thereby generated huge sums and diverted and laundered the money for different purposes by be-fooling the common people. It is true that the debenture was advertised in 2001-2002 and this accused petitioner was a field Officer appointed by the Chairman Gautam Kundu of the company who is the key person in planning of such chit fund companies to the public at large but the accused petitioner was indicated as a Debenture Trustee of the accused company no. 1 obviously because of his expertise and designed in mobilisation the public at large to procure more and more money befooling the common public on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
