TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 507X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stigation; soon after they were summoned and co-operated investigation. Reply fled by the Enforcement Directorate suggests, that the investigation is not complete and non-co-operation of the applicant has resulted into lack of financial information available with the respondent in respect of over-seas companies, their bank accounts and financial transaction. Prosecution in their reply has submitted that the applicant has not co-operated in respect of financial information of over-seas companies; that investigation is still going on and there is likelihood of applicant meddling with the investigation, if released on bail. The applicant cannot be released on Bail - application dismissed. - BAIL APPLICATION NO.1437 OF 2020 - - - Dated: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n such terms to ensure and secure his presence for the trial. Besides, applicant has also relied on the order of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Bail Application No.1322 of 2020 in the case of Deepak Kochar v. Directorate of Enforcement. 4. Heard Dr. Sujay Kantawala, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Venegaokar, the learned prosecutor for the respondent no.1. 5. Briefly, stated, prosecution case is that; (i) On a complaint, filed by the IndusInd Bank, Mumbai, D.B.Marg Police Station, Mumbai, FIR No.365/2015 dated 24.12.2015 was lodged against, M/s. Yogeshwar Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Shree Charbhuja Diamonds Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Kanika Gems Pvt. Ltd. and Directors Shri Anil Kumar Moolchand Toshniwal, Sunil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de accused nos.1,2,3,4,5 and 6 respectively; (iv) The investigation revealed; (a) that, the Accused Nos.4,5 and 6, fraudulently remitted funds, to the Hong Kong based company by submitting forged bills of entry and other import documents to IndusInd Bank Ltd; (b) That M/s. Yogeshwar Diamonds had remitted a total amount of USD $ 21165198.96 equivalent to Indian ₹ 131,37,40,510/-; USD $ 1253115.10 equivalent to ₹ 7,81,48,789.38 + USD $ 19912083.86 equivalent to ₹ 123,55,91,720.62 to Hong Kong based entities/company in the guise of import advance and post import under forged Bill of Entries and bogus Invoices; and (c) That M/s. Shree Charbhuja remitted a total amount of USD $ 25620839.27 equivalent to ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny, he generated huge funds and has also managed various bank accounts with the intention of laundering of funds through dubious companies through scores of such bank accounts controlled by him. (e) As a result, he has remitted huge funds to Hong Kong based bogus companies. (f) He has floated various fictitious companies for routing of funds with the help of other co-accused. (g) The funds amounting to ₹ 19,76,89,000/- have been transferred from the aforementioned his firm/companies to the accused companies. (h) That from his companies huge funds to the tune of ₹ 1,52,90,000/- has been transferred to the account of his wife Mrs. Kushboo Kothari; (I) That his father Shri Narendra Kothari received an amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the instance of Manager, Indusind Bank under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the four companies, its directors as aforesaid. Investigation revealed the sum of ₹ 17,82,75,411/- was fraudulently remitted by the accused companies, to M/s. Link Fai Ltd. and M/s. Sky Light Ltd. under the pretext of payment of import of loose and rough diamonds by using fake/forged bill of entries and bogus invoices. Fact revealed, the Saurabh Pandit was director of M/s. Link Fai Limited and M/s. Sky Light Ltd. However, the accusations against the applicant are different and in fact, while granting bail to co-accused Saurabh Pandit, Court had observed Vijay Kothari was king-pin and primary role was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicant has not co-operated in respect of financial information of over-seas companies; that investigation is still going on and there is likelihood of applicant meddling with the investigation, if released on bail. 9. It may be stated, that economic offences are to be view seriously as it constitutes class apart and need to be visited with different approach in the matter of bail. This Court in the case of Rana Kapur v. Directorate of Enforcement and Anr. in Criminal Bail Application No.4999 of 2020 has observed that since economic offence involves and causes huge loss to the public funds, it need to be viewed seriously, since it affects economy of the country as a whole. 10. In so far as order granting bail to Deepak Kochar is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
