9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 1436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 469, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code have been registered. According to the first F.I.R., i.e., 339/18 the complainant Shri Shashi Kumar alleged that two bank A/c Nos.447520110000729 and 447520110000731 held in the name of his brothers, namely, Shri Rajnish Kumar and Shri Shailesh Kumar and one bank A/c No.447520110000742 in the name of his firm M/s Shiva Agro Enterprises held with Bank of India, GB Road, Gaya were misutilized in connivance with the Bank Officials, in as much as, huge amount of cash was deposited and transferred to other accounts without their knowledge and consent. Whereas according to the second F.I.R., i.e., 340/2016 the complainant Rajesh Kumar also alleged that Bank A/c. Nos.447520110000726 and 447520110000725 held in his name and in the name of his wife Smt. Ruby Kumari held with Bank of India, GB Road, Gaya were misutilized in connivance with the Bank Officials, in as much as, huge amount of cash was deposited and transferred to other accounts without their knowledge and consent. On the basis of the Letter No.244/C dated 22.12.2016 issued by the Superintendent of Police, Economic Offence, Patna ECIR No.PTZO/05/2016 d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner came into contact with one Mr. Pawan Jain and his Mr. Chakresh Jain of Gaya to which the petitioner sold huge quantity of sugar to them which he had bought from M/s. K.M. Sugar Mills, Faizabad, U.P. from his allotted agent M/s Bajrangilal & Sons. It is submitted that Pawan Jain and Chakresh Jain paid the amount for sugar to the petitioner through different accounts and also instructed him to make bills and invoices in those names as in business transactions a businessman never mind to receive payments from other sources/parties as it is assumed that they have sold the goods to other parties and arranged the payment directly to his account. It is submitted that shocked when he received a letter from E.D. regarding the payments received from these accounts on the instruction of Pawan Jain and Chakresh Jain. It is further argued that the petitioner purchased sugar from K.M. Sugar Mills Ltd. through his allotted agent M/s Bajranglal & Sons. who arranged the trucks from different transport of Faizabad and Benaras and petitioner received payments from Chakresh Jain through the account of Smt. Ruby Kumari and on his instruction the petitioner paid the amount to sugar mills ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s made accused. No cash was ever deposited in the Firm's bank account even as per ED rather it is a case of transfer by RTGS funds in the bank account of the firm of the petitioner the name whereof is M/s Shivam Agency. There is no allegation against the petitioner that he made the transfer from the bank accounts of individuals in the bank account of the petitioner's firm. The petitioner is a sugar trader/agent and earns profit through commission by accepting orders from traders, like, Chakresh Jain who ordered for supply of sugar which he forwards to sugar mills. The ED has not disputed the business of this petitioner. In business, each and every buyer need not be personally known to the agent. He has already explained before ED that he received orders from Shri Chakresh Jain, Son of Shri Pawan Kumar Jain and received payments towards the orders from him. 7. The previous relationship of this petitioner with said Shri Chakresh Jain is admitted even as per the CDR analysis of ED that he was in touch with others as well as with this petitioner which establishes that this petitioner had prior relationship with said Chakresh Jain and on whose instructions and orders, the goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inal Complaint Case No.69/2018 was lodged by the petitioner-accused after one year and three months, i.e., on 13.02.2017, as an after thought, in an attempt to distance himself from the tainted money and to project the same as untainted. It is further argued that Section 3 of the P.M.L. Act, 2002 states that "Whatsoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected [proceeds of crime including its concealment, possession, acquisition or use and projecting or claiming] it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money laundering" whereas Section 24 of the P.M.L. Act is relating to burden of proof which says that "in the case of a person charged with the offence of money laundering U/s 3, the Authority or court shall, unless the contrary is proved, presume that such proceeds of crime are involved in money laundering". The learned Additional Solicitor General further submits that the petitioner personally, did not know Smt. Rubi Kumari, Shri Vimal Kumar and the proprietor of M/s Shiva Textiles & M/s Bhola Textiles and has not sold sugar to them. The petitioner received ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The above statement of Shri Rajesh Kumar has also been reiterated by Smt. Rubi Kumari. 13. Mr. Singh, the learned Additional Solicitor General referred to the amended Section 45 of the PMLA, which says that the offences are cognizable and non-bailable. Section 45 of the Act (as amended vide Finance Act, 2018) reads as under: 45. Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable.-- (1) [Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), no person accused of an offence [under this Act] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless--] (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given a opportunity to oppose the application for such release; and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail: Provided that a person, who, is under the age of sixteen years, or is a woman or is sick or infirm, [or is accused either on his own or along with other co-accused of money- laundering a sum of less than one crore rupees] may be released on bail, if the Special Court so directs: &n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icipatory bail may be given only if the High Court is of the view that accused has not committed any offence under the PML Act. Whereas, in the instant case there are sufficient materials to prove the complicity of the petitioner. Charge against accused persons has not been proved by Special (PMLA) Court, Patna due to non- appearance of the accused persons of this case including the petitioner. 17. After considering the submissions of the parties, in my opinion, the offence of money laundering damages the economic and financial system of the country and it can put the economy on hold or can derail it. It is more serious than the murder. The money laundering is not only used for the drug trading but also for terrorist activities and such crime affect the integrity and sovereignty of the country. 18. From consideration of the above facts and circumstances of the case basically from the allegations as made in paragraphs 1 to 64 in supplementary complaint petition, it reveals that the bank accounts in the name of the complainant and others were misused in connivance with the bank officials of G.B. Road, Gaya inasmuch as huge amount of cash was deposited and transferred to different o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
