TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 957X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss transactions - The Applicant cannot feign ignorance to these transactions as these transactions relate to purchase of material for SBFL and the Applicant admittedly was VP (Purchases). Apart from fake invoices, fake transport invoices for these LCs were arranged under the applicant and others. Investigations revealed that total payment of Rs 342.05 crores (Rs. 111.26 crores in the form of L/C and Rs. 229.79 crores in the form of direct payments made from bank accounts) were made to 05 vendors of SBFL. On verification of (TAN and PAN) numbers of these vendors and their transporters, 02 of these vendors were found having invalid TAN and PAN of the non-existent transporters - the emails show the involvement of the applicant in the running of the affairs and business dealings of SBFL as he was either the originator or primary recipient. In view of such clear emails, at this stage a finding cannot be given that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused/applicant is not guilty of offence of money laundering. The emails categorially lead one to infer that the applicant was directly involved in process/activity connected to the proceeds of crime. As per the state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he applicant is not guilty of the offence of money laundering - the application for bail of Mr. Tarun Kumar is dismissed. - BAIL APPLN. 152/2023 - - - Dated:- 18-7-2023 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH For the Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Malak Bhatt, Ms. Neeha Nagpal, Ms. Samridhi, Ms. Arshia Ghose, Advs. For the Respondent Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Spl. Counsel with Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Mr. Kartik Sabharwal, Advs. JUDGMENT JASMEET SINGH, J Facts: 1. This is an application seeking bail in Complaint Case No. 20 of 2021 bearing ECIR/DLCO-1/12/2021 arising out of FIR No. RC0742020E0014 wherein the applicant has been charged u/s 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and u/s 120B r/w 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, 1860 and is in custody since 22.06.2022. The applicant is alleged to have been involved in the offence of money laundering. The allegations against the applicant are that the applicant aided in fraudulent increase of inventory/stock in the account books of M/s Shakti Bhog Foods Limited [ SBFL ] which helped in increasing the borrowings. 2. The SBFL was engaged in manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CMD of SBFL, who was also named as one of the directing minds and will of SBFL in the FIR/ECIR by the Respondent, was arrested on 03.07.2021. Raman Bhuraria, the then Internal Auditor of SBFL was also arrested on 13.08.2021. Subsequently, the Applicant, was summoned for questioning during the course of investigation. The Respondent proceeded to arrest the Applicant on 22.06.2022. 8. As per the Arrest Memo dated 22.06.2022, it is alleged that the Applicant was beneficiary of the proceeds of crime, from SBFL, which amounted to INR 1,00,00,000 over a period of 9 years from 2008 to 2017. It was further alleged that the Applicant was a shareholder / director of various group entities of SBFL and that such entities provided a platform to SBFL to divert and rotate its loan funds changing its nature from liability to assets, thus, leading to commission of offence of money-laundering as defined under Section 3 of the PMLA 2002. Submissions by the Applicant 9. It is stated the Applicant was neither named in FIR No.RC0742020E0014 nor named initially in the ECIR No. ECIR/DLZO-01/12/2021 dated 31.01.2021 as the Applicant had no active involvement or role in the management of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stated that the alleged proceeds of crime totaling INR 1,00,00,000 attributed to the applicant is nothing but remuneration from SBFL. Submissions by the Respondents 17. On the contrary, it has been stated by the Respondent that the Applicant aided in fraudulent increase of inventory/stock in the account books of SBFL which helped in increasing the borrowings. 18. The Respondent ED submits that Applicant played an active role in the offence of money laundering namely acquisition of proceeds of crime, its concealment as well as diversion. 19. The allegations that the statements of employees being relied upon are cut, copy, paste is unsubstantiated for the reasons that merely because there is an overlap in certain part of the statements there cannot be a presumption that voluntary statements recorded under section 50 of PMLA are unreliable. The veracity of these statements cannot be doubted especially when the makers of the statements have neither resiled nor alleged any kind of coercion. 20. It is stated that the applicant was a nephew of Mr. Kewal Krishan Kumar. Mr. Kewal Kishan Kumar was the main Promoter and the Managing Director of SBFL. The accused was also t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h facts and circumstances as are sufficient in themselves to justify satisfaction that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence (vide Union of India v. Shiv Shanker Kesari [(2007) 7 SCC 798 : (2007) 3 SCC (Cri) 505]). Thus, recording of satisfaction on both the aspects, noted above, is sine qua non for granting of bail under the NDPS Act. (Emphasis Supplied) 26. Section 3 of PMLA defined the offence of money laundering as : Offence of money-laundering. Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the[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. [ Explanation .--For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that,-- (i) a person shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering if such person is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to indulge or knowingly assisted or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in one or more of the following processes or activities connected with proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons as these transactions relate to purchase of material for SBFL and the Applicant admittedly was VP (Purchases). 33. During the period 2013-2017, Letter of Credit (LC) documents valuing Rs. 111.26 crores were crystallized by SBFL on the strength of fake bills with various shell companies without any genuine business transactions. 34. The active role and involvement of the Applicant in the offence of money laundering is evident from the fact that the Applicant was verifying the LC documents, based on fake invoices procured from the shell entities and placing his signatures therein. The email dated 18.11.2013 which was sent by Mr. Ewin (employee SBFL) to other persons in which Applicant was also marked fortifies the same. In the email, there are approved bills, showing Professional Fees for arranging supplier bills . and scans of cheques issued to J.R. Ladha Financial Services Pvt Ltd, the bills were arranged by SBFL from entry providers and was verified by Applicant. Again, Applicant cannot feign ignorance as he is marked in the emails. 35. Apart from fake invoices, fake transport invoices for these LCs were arranged under the applicant and others. Inves ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning of the affairs and business dealings of SBFL as he was either the originator or primary recipient. In view of such clear emails, I at this stage cannot give a finding that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused/applicant is not guilty of offence of money laundering. The emails categorially lead one to infer that the applicant was directly involved in process/activity connected to the proceeds of crime. 39. Moreover, the applicant has also not been able to bring home the point that he was only director for the namesake. The statements of various employees of SBFL would also lead to reasonable inference that he is actively connected with the process or activity relating to the proceeds of crime. The incriminating statements are as under:- A) The statements of Sh. Sandeep Mishra, Accountant (SBFL), which was recorded on 01.07.2022 u/s 50 PMLA On being asked about role of Tarun Kumar, I want to state that all such mails were marked to Tarun Kumar as fake bills raised by dummy entities were discounted as per instructions of Tarun Kumar. I want to further state that Tarun Kumar used to coordinate with entry operators for purchasing fake bills and he was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t piece of evidence which can be relied upon to reject bail. 31. Suffice it to observe that the appellant has not succeeded in persuading us about the inapplicability of the threshold stipulation under Section 45 of the Act. In the facts of the present case, we are in agreement with the view taken by the Sessions Court and by the High Court. We have independently examined the materials relied upon by the prosecution and also noted the inexplicable silence or reluctance of the appellant in disclosing the source from where such huge value of demonetised currency and also new currency has been acquired by him. The prosecution is relying on statements of 26 witnesses/accused already recorded, out of which 7 were considered by the Delhi High Court. These statements are admissible in evidence, in view of Section 50 of the 2002 Act. The same makes out a formidable case about the involvement of the appellant in commission of a serious offence of money laundering. It is, therefore, not possible for us to record satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the appellant is not guilty of such offence. Further, the courts below have justly adverted to the antecede ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommit the alleged offense. The court at this stage is not required to delve deep into the evidence collected by the investigating agency or to make any findings about its authenticity or relevance to the applicant. I am also not required to make a finding of guilt, conduct a mini-trial, or meticulously examine the evidence. I only need to determine whether the applicant has successfully made out a case for me to state that there are reasonable grounds for believing that applicant is not guilty of the offence of money laundering. For the reasons stated above I cannot do so. 45. In view of the above facts, I am of the opinion that there is sufficient incriminating evidence about the involvement of the accused/applicant in the offence of money laundering. 46. It is not only the statements u/s 50 PMLA which show the involvement of the applicant but other material such as emails as well as documents containing the signatures of the applicant which are also indicative of involvement of the applicant in the offence of money laundering. The statements have not been retracted. 47. The judgment of Raman Bhuraria (supra) is not applicable to facts of the present case. Firstly, unlike ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
