TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 1680X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceeds of crime and, therefore, shifted to the applicant under Section 24 of the PML Act, 2002. The applicant has filed Criminal Revision No. 1129/2018, coaccused Sh. Abrar Baig and Vinod Malewar have filed CRR Nos. 898/2018 and 816/2018 respectively, which are still pending consideration. Earlier, in Scheduled Offence, the present applicant was granted bail by this Court on 23.08.2019 and in the present bail application, the applicant is facing charge under the PML Act. Though, according to the medical documents, the applicant is suffering from serious physical ailment but no such document is there on record which could establish that he is suffering from any life threatening disease. He was granted temporary bail for 20 days by this Court for quality treatment of his disease. Taking into consideration the entire circumstances of the case, judicial pronouncement of Supreme Court in Rohit (supra), gravity of offence and further considering the fact that the applicant is a Govt. Servant (In-charge Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department) and the manner in which the public money is alleged to have been laundered by the applicant, bail cannot be granted. The application filed u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submits that this is a complaint case on which cognizance has been taken by the Court below. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court towards order sheets of the Court below dated 16.07.2018, 20.08.2018, 06.10.2018, and 11.10.2018 and submits that the trial Court is adjourning the matter on each and every hearing on account of pending of criminal revisions filed before this Court by the applicant and other co-accused persons. The applicant himself surrendered before the trial Court and he has not misused the temporary bail granted to him nor has influenced any witness. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in this case there are as many as 9 accused persons including present applicant and bail application of present applicant has only been vehemently and strongly opposed by the Prosecution, whereas formal objection was raised by the Special Public Prosecutor in respect of bail of others. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that till date there is no progress at all in the trial and the trial Court is simply adjourning the matter. Thus, it is apparent that disposal of the case may take long time. Other accuse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the proceeds of crime. Learned counsel submitted that the present applicant used the different methods by submitting false documents, to acquire tender in favour of his brother to engage in the laundering of tainted money which brought such transactions squarely within the scope and ambit of Section 3 of the PML Act. The learned counsel submitted that the enormous sums of money held by the applicant in wife's business, her account and in brother's business and the transactions in respect thereof, prima facie indicated the involvement of the applicant in dealing with proceeds of crime and projecting the same as untainted property, which was sufficient to attract the provisions of Section 3 of the PML Act, 2002. The learned counsel for respondent submitted that under Section 24 of the aforesaid Act, when a person is accused of having committed an offence under Section 3, the burden of proving that the money involved were neither proceeds of crime nor untainted property, is on the accused. It was urged that once a definite allegation had been made against the applicant on the basis of documents seized, that the money in his various accounts were the proceeds of crime, the burd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... design profiting himself and his relatives regardless of the consequence to the community. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the decisions of Supreme Court in the matter of State of Gujarat Vs. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal and another reported in AIR 1987 SC 1321 and Nikesh Tarachand Shah Vs. Union of India and another reported in (2018) 11 SCC. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. It is true that at present there may or may not be direct or indirect attempts to indulge the applicant in any process of activity connected with the proceeds of crime, there is no attempt on the part of the applicant to disclose the source of the large sums of money handled by him. There is no denying the fact that allegations have been made that the said money was the proceeds of crime and by depositing or investing the same in his wife's account and in the business of his wife and brother, the applicant has attempted to project the same as untainted money. The said allegations may be the subject matter of final outcome of the trial, but having been made, the burden of proof that the said money is not the proceeds of crime and, therefore, shifte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
