TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax Department. Further, while granting regular bail to the petitioner in the case arising out of ECIR dated 08.08.2021 also, the condition to seek prior permission of the Court before travelling abroad was imposed by the learned ASJ. The investigation against the petitioner is pending in both the cases i.e. in FIR registered by the Special Cell (EOW) and in the ECIR registered by the Directorate of Enforcement. The liberty and the fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution to travel abroad is not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions, and this restriction was imposed upon the petitioner while he was granted anticipatory bail in the present FIR and regular bail in the present ECIR. In this Court s opinion, learned ASJ has rightly held that petitioner has not placed on record any cogent reason to travel abroad and that there is no permanent address of the petitioner in Dubai. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 08.07.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-03, New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi - Petition dismissed. - HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA For the Petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ersonal liberty of the petitioner who is already enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that he has placed on record all the relevant documents regarding the permanent address of the petitioner as well as his business in Dubai to which he wants to attend to, and therefore, it is prayed that present petitions be allowed and petitioner be granted permission to travel to Dubai for a period of 30 days. 4. Vehemently opposing the present petitions, learned Special Counsel for Directorate of Enforcement states that an LOC already stands opened by the ED as well as the Income Tax Department which has not been cancelled yet. It is argued that the petitioner is an international hawala operator based in Dubai and he had aided the main accused Sukash Chandrashekhar in transferring an amount of Rs. 24 crore to Dubai. It is stated that petitioner has no roots in India and is a flight risk, and that the application seeking cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner herein is pending adjudication and is listed for 09.01.2024. It is also argued that the learned ASJ has passed a reasoned order discussing therein that the petitioner had not provided his permanent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court. Sh. Akhand Pratap Singh, ld. SPP for State while filing the reply, copy supplied, raised the objection for traveling to Dubai as he submits that there is absolute dispute with regard to the fact that accused is resident of Dubai and that he is carrying out jewelry business over there. Ld. SPP for State rather submits that prosecution has rather made specific allegation that accused/applicant has been indulged in hawala transaction from Dubai as well as in India. It is also stated in reply of State that investigation qua applicant is at initial stage and that accused/applicant may evade from investigation as well as from trial if permitted to travel to Dubai . Similar are the objections of Sh. Suraj Rathi, ld . SPP for ED who has also filed the reply for the application moved for ED matter. Copy supplied. Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that even if prosecution might be disputing above referred facts, fact remains that applicant has been residing in Dubai earlier and therefore has a right to visit Dubai for enabling him to carry on his business there as it is a fundamental right. Ld. Counsel further submits that he is ready to abide by the terms if any impos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in its investigation established that Jai Prakash Singhal i.e. present petitioner had arranged 18 shell companies to Komal Poddar for transferring money of the complainant to Dubai through RTGS/Cash for accused Sukash Chandrashekhar. The chargesheet also reveals that the complainants had transferred Rs. 31.54 crore from their RBL Bank accounts to various firms/companies through RTGS as per instructions of RBL Bank manager Komal Poddar and his associates to send money to persons in Dubai as per codes and instructions given by Sukash Chandrashekhar. During investigation, Komal Poddar, Manager of RBL Bank disclosed that he with the help of his associates had cheated the complainant on the pretext of helping and transferring their money deposited in RBL Bank accounts to the desired destinations. He had managed the transactions through his associates Avinash and Jitender Narula through 18 shell companies. He had informed that total money transferred through them was Rs. 31.50 crore, and around Rs. 24 crore was transferred to Dubai. Remaining Rs. 7.20 crore was to be transferred by them on 12.02.2021 to 07 shell companies through RTGS which were misappropriated by them. During investi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 10.04.2023 and that the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail in this case vide order dated 20.04.2023, one of the conditions in the order by virtue of which he was granted anticipatory bail was that he will not leave the country without the permission of the Court. Thus, the anticipatory bail granted to him was by way of a conditional order, which was accepted by the petitioner and he had returned to India on 25.04.2023. The LOC opened by the State/EOW also stands cancelled vide order dated 26.04.2023. However, the LOC opened by the Directorate of Enforcement has neither been cancelled nor quashed and remains in existence, alongwith an another LOC opened by the Income Tax Department. Further, while granting regular bail to the petitioner in the case arising out of ECIR dated 08.08.2021 also, the condition to seek prior permission of the Court before travelling abroad was imposed by the learned ASJ. 10. As per the submissions made on behalf of State, it has verified the rent/tenancy contract pertaining to the residential address of the petitioner in Dubai, and the records reveal that the tenancy contract had expired on 14.04.2023 and therefore, the petitioner arri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
