TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. D. Sanjay, learned Additional Solicitor General (hereinafter referred to as 'ASG'), along with Ms. Kanak Verma, learned Central Government Counsel for the Union of India - Opposite Parties. 3. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Special Trial No. (PMLA) 2 of 2018 under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 4. The allegation against the petitioner is of money laundering by depositing demonetized notes of more than Rs. 44 crores in accounts of various persons, including his own, and thereafter transferring it through RTGS into accounts of various other persons at Delhi and Kolkata, mostly in fictitious accounts. 5. Le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner is alleged to have transferred the money at the behest of Dhiraj Jain and he has been granted bail and, thus, the petitioner also is entitled to such indulgence. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has given his statement to the authorities and all his papers are presently in the custody of the Special Court and, thus, there cannot be any tampering by him. It was further submitted that the petitioner having a running mill, there was no chances of him absconding. Learned counsel submitted that only on presumption and the statement of the Bank officials, who have tried to falsely implicate the petitioner, he has been made accused. Learned counsel contended that Shashi Kumar and Rajesh Kumar, who have filed cases that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecessarily, the petitioner is languishing in jail. Learned counsel submitted that in the complaint itself, it has been written that the petitioner, Dhiraj Jain and two others were in touch right from the beginning and, thus, the case of Dhiraj Jain stands on a similar footing to that of the petitioner. 6. Mr. S D Sanjay, learned ASG submitted that the petitioner is in fact the main player in the whole episode. It was submitted that he is the person who actually brought the demonetized cash to the Bank where it was allowed to be deposited in the accounts of others persons without their knowledge and subsequently, they were transferred through RTGS to other accounts. It was submitted that Shashi Kumar and Rajesh Kumar had given blank cheques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the High Court and has reiterated the law that on the basis of materials, the Court has to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of such offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. In the present case, learned counsel submitted that in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite parties, materials have been brought on record, most importantly, the statement given by the petitioner himself under Section 50 of the Act, which is admissible in law, with regard to his complicity in the entire act where he admits that he had deposited demonetized notes in such accounts, including his own. Learned counsel submitted that even otherwise, there has been corroboratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en the second criterion under Section 45 of the Act is not satisfied and goes against the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that the Court may also take note of the larger ramification, as has been indicated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Y. S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. CBI, since reported as (2013) 7 SCC 439, where it has been held that economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. It was submitted that the present case would amount to fraud on the public exchequer since notes which were demonetized with the objective that they should go out of circulation have been made legitimate by such illegal act of the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned counsel for the petitioner that trial be directed to be concluded within a fixed time-period, since all the evidence has been collected and the matter otherwise also is of public importance, the Court below as well as the parties shall ensure that the trial is expedited and completed at the earliest, preferably within a period of one year.
10. At this juncture, as it has been pointed out by learned ASG that due to the prevailing circumstances, the trial may not be able to commence for the present, the Court would only observe that in the meantime, all pre-trial formalities be completed, so as to ensure that when the Courts resume normal functioning, the trial proceeds without any further delay. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|