9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1233X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4, 506, 341, 323 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code since offences under Section 420 and 467 of IPC are Scheduled Offences under Part A of the Schedule of PMLA, 2002. Purportedly, another FIR number 137 of 2023 dated 10.05.2023 under Sections 120B, 465, 467, 468 & 471 of the Indian Penal Code was also registered at Hare Street PS, Kolkata on the basis of the report of the fact finding committee of the Registrar of Assurances, Kolkata which has also been made a part of the investigation as the FIR has been registered for three different forged deeds which were manufactured to acquire different landed properties including the property measuring 1 acre at Cheshire Home Road, Plot No 28, Khata No. 37, Mouza Gari, Ranchi, Jharkhand. 3. It has been stated that the FIR being Sadar P.S. Case No. 399 of 2022 was registered on the directions of the Ld. Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 3111 of 2021 passed vide order dated 28.06.2022. A complaint case was also filed by Umesh Kumar Gope against Rajesh Rai, Imtiaz Ahmad, Bharat Prasad, Lakhan Singh, Punit Bhargav and Bishnu Kumar Agarwal for fraudulently acquiring one acre of land situated at Cheshire Home Road, Plot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /RNZO/10/2023 dated 07.03.2023 and the Prosecution Complaint was filed on 01.09.2023. 8. Meanwhile, the present petitioner was taken into custody on 11.08.2023, accordingly, he, preferred Miscellaneous Criminal Application (MCA No. 2810 of 2023) but the same was rejected on 20.09.2023, hence, the instant bail application. Argument on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner 9. Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has taken the following grounds that: - (i) Even if the entire ECIR will be taken into consideration, no offence will be said to be committed so as to attract the ingredients of Sections 3 & 4 of the P.M.L. Act, 2002. (ii) The allegation against the petitioner is that he, being the influential person, has cooperated in the illegal transfer of the land pertaining to the land in question, i.e., measuring 1 acre at Cheshire Home Road, Plot No. 28, Khata No. 37, Mouza Gari, Ranchi, Jharkhand, save and except the said allegation, there is no allegation against the petitioner. (iii) The ECIR has been directed to be initiated by proceeding of issuance of summon against the petitioner. The Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, is ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he complaint of ECIR, is based upon the criminal case instituted at Kolkata, hence, the authorities sitting in the State of Jharkhand, will have no jurisdiction to initiate an inquiry by issuance of summon the Act, 2002. (vii) The ground of mens rea has also been taken by making reference that there was no intention of the petitioner to commit an offence said to attract the money laundering. (viii) The ground of parity has also been taken, since, once Bishnu Kumar Agarwala has been granted bail by the coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 12.01.2024 passed in B.A. No. 10166 of 2023. According to the petitioner, the case of the said Bishnu Kumar Agarwala is exactly similar to that of the present petitioner and hence, applying the principle of parity, the petitioner of the present case is also fit to be released on bail. (ix) The reliance of some of the paragraphs of the judgment of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors., reported in (2022) SCC OnLine SC 929 has been made as under paragraphs-235, 239, 243, 252, 253, 388, 400 and 401. The purpose for putting reliance upon these paragraphs are that the very object and intent of the P.M.L. Act is t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... going on and in course thereof, when it was detected in the aforesaid Sadar P.S. Case No. 399 of 2022 of illegal transfer of land based upon the forged documents, then on investigation of the said case, when the Police has conducted an investigation, then it was found that the documents pertaining to the land in question has been fabricated by commission of forgery and in consequence thereof, an FIR was instituted being Hare Street P.S. Case No. 137 of 2023, therefore, the inquiry which is the subject matter of the present criminal prosecution, is based upon the allegation, as available in Sadar P.S. Case No. 399 of 2022. 14. The land since is situated in the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Jharkhand, hence, the authority as defined under Section 49/51 of the P.M.L. Act, 2002 having jurisdiction to initiate a proceeding in case of any predicate/schedule offence within the territory of the State of Jharkhand is competent enough to initiate inquiry and accordingly, the inquiry has been initiated by Assistant Director of the Directorate of Enforcement. 15. So far, the contention as has been raised that all the scheduled offences cannot be said to be attracted under the P.M. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vernment, setting up of agencies and mechanisms for coordinating measures for combating money-laundering and also to prosecute the persons indulging in the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime. 23. The issues were debated threadbare in the United Nation Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Basle Statement of Principles enunciated in 1989, the FATF established at the summit of seven major industrial nations held in Paris from 14th to 16th July, 1989, the Political Declaration and Noble Programme of Action adopted by United Nations General Assembly vide its Resolution No. S-17/2 of 23.2.1990, the United Nations in the Special Session on countering World Drug Problem Together concluded on the 8th to the 10th June, 1998, urging the State parties to enact a comprehensive legislation. This is evident from the introduction and Statement of Objects and Reasons accompanying the Bill which became the 2002 Act. The same reads thus: "INTRODUCTION Money-laundering poses a serious threat not only to the financial systems of countries, but also to their integrity and sovereignty. To obviate such threats international community h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... event financial institutions from being used for laundering of drug related money and enactment of legislation to prevent such laundering. (e) the United Nations in the Special Session on countering World Drug Problem Together concluded on the 8th to the 10th June, 1998 has made another declaration regarding the need to combat money-laundering. India is a signatory to this declaration." 24. It is thus evident that the Act 2002 was enacted in order to answer the urgent requirement to have a comprehensive legislation inter alia for preventing money-laundering, attachment of proceeds of crime, adjudication and confiscation thereof for combating money-laundering and also to prosecute the persons indulging in the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime. 25. It needs to refer herein the definition of "proceeds of crime" as provided under Section 2(1)(u) of the Act, 2002 which reads as under: "2(u) "proceeds of crime" means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property 3[or where such property is taken or held outside the country, then the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heduled offence" has been defined under Section 2(1)(y) which reads as under: "2(y) "scheduled offence" means- (i) the offences specified under Part A of the Schedule; or (ii) the offences specified under Part B of the Schedule if the total value involved in such offences is [one crore rupees] or more; or (iii) the offences specified under Part C of the Schedule." 32. It is evident that the "scheduled offence" means the offences specified under Part A of the Schedule; or the offences specified under Part B of the Schedule if the total value involved in such offences is [one crore rupees] or more; or the offences specified under Part C of the Schedule. 33. The offence of money laundering has been defined under Section 3 of the Act, 2002 which reads as under: "3. 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 doubt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entity] and examining him on oath; (c) compelling the production of records; (d) receiving evidence on affidavits; (e) issuing commissions for examination of witnesses and documents; and (f) any other matter which may be prescribed. (2) The Director, Additional Director, Joint Director, Deputy Director or Assistant Director shall have power to summon any person whose attendance he considers necessary whether to give evidence or to produce any records during the course of any investigation or proceeding under this Act. (3) All the persons so summoned shall be bound to attend in person or through authorised agents, as such officer may direct, and shall be bound to state the truth upon any subject respecting which they are examined or make statements, and produce such documents as may be required. (4) Every proceeding under sub-sections (2) and (3) shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of section 193 and section 228 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). (5) Subject to any rules made in this behalf by the Central Government, any officer referred to in sub-section (2) may impound and retain in his custody for such period, as he thinks fit, any r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of India and other ongoing statutes have been read consistently with the rules of international law. It is also observed that the Constitution of India and the enactments made by Parliament must necessarily be understood in the context of the present-day scenario and having regard to the international treaties and convention as our constitution takes note of the institutions of the world community which had been created. In Apparel Export Promotion Council v. A.K. Chopra, the Court observed that domestic Courts are under an obligation to give due regard to the international conventions and norms for construing the domestic laws, more so, when there is no inconsistency between them and there is a void in domestic law. This view has been restated in Githa Hariharan, as also in People's Union for Civil Liberties, and National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India." 40. The implication of Section 50 has also been taken into consideration. Relevant paragraph, i.e., paragraphs-422, 424, 425, 431, 434 reads as under: "422. The validity of this provision has been challenged on the ground of being violative of Articles 20(3) and 21 of the Constitution. For, it allows the author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Section 50 of the 2002 Act. The criticism is essentially because of sub-section (4) which provides that every proceeding under sub-sections (2) and (3) shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of Sections 193 and 228 of the IPC. Even so, the fact remains that Article 20(3) or for that matter Section 25 of the Evidence Act, would come into play only when the person so summoned is an accused of any offence at the relevant time and is being compelled to be a witness against himself. This position is well-established. The Constitution Bench of this Court in M.P. Sharma had dealt with a similar challenge wherein warrants to obtain documents required for investigation were issued by the Magistrate being violative of Article 20(3) of the Constitution. This Court opined that the guarantee in Article 20(3) is against "testimonial compulsion" and is not limited to oral evidence. Not only that, it gets triggered if the person is compelled to be a witness against himself, which may not happen merely because of issuance of summons for giving oral evidence or producing documents. Further, to be a witness is nothing more than to furnish evidence and such evidence can be f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oes not call for decision in this case." (emphasis supplied) 431. In the context of the 2002 Act, it must be remembered that the summon is issued by the Authority under Section 50 in connection with the inquiry regarding proceeds of crime which may have been attached and pending adjudication before the Adjudicating Authority. In respect of such action, the designated officials have been empowered to summon any person for collection of information and evidence to be presented before the Adjudicating Authority. It is not necessarily for initiating a prosecution against the noticee as such. The power entrusted to the designated officials under this Act, though couched as investigation in real sense, is to undertake inquiry to ascertain relevant facts to facilitate initiation of or pursuing with an action regarding proceeds of crime, if the situation so warrants and for being presented before the Adjudicating Authority. It is a different matter that the information and evidence so collated during the inquiry made, may disclose commission of offence of money-laundering and the involvement of the person, who has been summoned for making disclosures pursuant to the summons issued by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed or dealt with in any manner which may result in frustrating any proceeding relating to confiscation of such proceeds under the 2002 Act. This Act is also to compel the banking companies, financial institutions and intermediaries to maintain records of the transactions, to furnish information of such transactions within the prescribed time in terms of Chapter IV of the 2002 Act. 42. The predicate offence has been considered in the aforesaid judgment wherein by taking into consideration the explanation as inserted by way of Act 23 of 2019 under the definition of the "proceeds of crime" as contained under Section 2(1)(u), whereby and whereunder, it has been clarified for the purpose of removal of doubts that, the "proceeds of crime" include property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence, meaning thereby, the words "any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence" will come under the fold of the proceeds of crime. 43. So far ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an 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: Provided further that the Special Court shall not take cognizance of any offence punishable under section 4 except upon a complaint in writing made by- (i) the Director; or (ii) any officer of the Central Government or a State Government authorised in writing in this behalf by the Central Government by a general or special order made in this behalf by that Government. [(1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (2 of 1974), or any other provision of this Act, no police officer shall investigate into an offence under this Act unless spec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udgment that owing to the declaration by a Court that the statute is unconstitutional obliterates the statute entirely as though it had never been passed, is contextual. In this case, the Court was dealing with the efficacy of the repealing Act. While doing so, the Court had adverted to the repealing Act and made the stated observation in the context of lack of legislative power. In the process of reasoning, it did advert to the exposition in Behram Khurshid Pesikaka and Deep Chand including American jurisprudence expounded in Cooley on Constitutional Limitations and Norton v. Shelby County." 45. Subsequently, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Tarun Kumar vs. Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement, (2023) SCC OnLine SC 1486 by taking into consideration the law laid down by the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. (supra), it has been laid down that since the conditions specified under Section 45 are mandatory, they need to be complied with. The Court is required to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and he is not likely to commit an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -284, it has been held that the Authority under the 2002 Act, is to prosecute a person for offence of money-laundering only if it has reason to believe, which is required to be recorded in writing that the person is in possession of "proceeds of crime". Only if that belief is further supported by tangible and credible evidence indicative of involvement of the person concerned in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime, action under the Act can be taken forward for attachment and confiscation of proceeds of crime and until vesting thereof in the Central Government, such process initiated would be a standalone process. 49. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gautam Kundu vs. Directorate of Enforcement (Prevention of Money-Laundering Act), Government of India through Manoj Kumar, Assistant Director, Eastern Region, reported in (2015) 16 SCC 1 has been pleased to hold at paragraph -30 that the conditions specified under Section 45 of PMLA are mandatory and need to be complied with, which is further strengthened by the provisions of Section 65 and also Section 71 of PMLA. Section 65 requires that the provisions of CrPC shall apply insofar as they are not inconsis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... role attached to the accused whose application is under consideration. For ready reference, paragraph-18 read as under: ".18. The submission of learned Counsel Mr. Luthra to grant bail to the appellant on the ground that the other co-accused who were similarly situated as the appellant, have been granted bail, also cannot be accepted. It may be noted that parity is not the law. While applying the principle of parity, the Court is required to focus upon the role attached to the accused whose application is under consideration. It is not disputed in that the main accused Sh. Kewal Krishan Kumar, Managing Director of SBFL, and KMP of group companies and the other accused Devki Nandan Garg, owner/operator/controller of various shell companies were granted bail on the ground of infirmity and medical grounds. The co-accused Raman Bhuraria, who was the internal auditor of SBFL has been granted bail by the High Court, however the said order of High Court has been challenged by the respondent before this Court by filing being SLP (Crl.) No. 9047 of 2023 and the same is pending under consideration. In the instant case, the High Court in the impugned order while repelling the said submissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... APA Act, it comes under the category 'c' which also includes money laundering offence wherein the bail has been directed to be granted if the investigation is complete but the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gurwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab and Anr. (supra) has taken the view by making note that the penal offences as enshrined under the provision of UAPA are also under category 'c' making reference that jail is the rule and bail is the exception. 54. Now coming to the grounds as has been raised on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner that even if the entire ECIR will be taken into consideration, no offence will be said to be committed so as to attract the ingredients of Sections 3 & 4 of the P.M.L. Act, 2002. Further ground has been taken the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, being the influential person, has cooperated in the illegal transfer of the land pertaining to the land in question, save and except the said allegation, there is no allegation against the petitioner. 55. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also taken the ground that in the prosecution complaint, the statement of the co-accused persons, namely, Saddam Hussain, Afshar A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for an amount of Rs. 1,02,60,000/- and Rs. 77,40,000/-). 3.5 Investigation reveals that Rajesh Rai in connivance with Bharat Prasad, Md. Saddam Hussain, Afshar Ali, Imtiaz Ahmed and others prepared one forged deed of 1948 was prepared by the accused persons and on the basis of that a power of attorney was given in favour of Imtiaz Ahmed and Bharat Prasad. The other accomplice namely Lakhan Singh became the confirming party in the deed and they executed sale deed dated 06.02.2021 {RUD No. 3 (i)} in favour of Punit Bhargava for an amount of Rs. 1,78,55,800/- which was registered as document no. 2021/RAN/1016/BK1/906 in book no. BK1, Vol. no. 112 from page no. 369 to 506 at the office of SRO, Ranchi. 3.6 Punit Bhargava further sold the said land to Bishnu Kumar Agarwal vide two sale deeds, both dated 01.04.2021, registered as document no. 2021/RAN/2784/BK1/2483 in book no. BK1, Vol. no. 316 from page no. 405 to 532 at the office of SRO, Ranchi (for an amount of Rs. 1,02,60,000/-) and document no. 2021/RAN/2783/BK1/2482 in book no. BK1, Vol. no. 316 from page no. 261 to 404 at the office of SRO, Ranchi (for an amount of Rs. 77,40,000). Brief detail of person examined under secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ali further stated that he accepted the consideration amount and further requested Prem Prakash to arrange for unblocking two plots of land, plot no. 891 and 893 measuring 1 acre 32 decimals (approx.) which were blocked from the D.C office. The said plots were part of a property admeasuring 3.81 acres of which fake deeds were prepared by Afshar Ali. Afshar Ali further stated that after talking to Chhavi Ranjan over this issue, Prem Prakash demanded Rs. 1 crore for the above work. The said amount of Rs. 1 crore was adjusted in the above said consideration amount of Rs. 1.5 crores. Later on, the said two blocks were unblocked but the other plot no. 903 was blocked by the D.C office which was beyond their understanding and the reason of the same was not known to him. He further stated that he came in contact with Prem Prakash and one of his associates Rajdeep Kumar used to act as a mediator between these two persons. Prem Prakash asked him to do the registry of the said one acre land situated at Cheshire Home Road in the name of his associate Punit Bhargava. Further he has stated that owing to the ill-health of Rajesh Rai, the power of attorney was given to Bharat Prasad and Imtiaz A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jail, Hotwar, Ranchi, he stated that he knows Bishnu Kumar Agarwal as a businessman and sometimes, he has met him during marriage events. He further stated that Punit Bhargava is like his younger brother and he is from his native place, so he knows him since childhood. From his statement dated 03.08.2023, (RUD No. 40) it reveals those three persons including Afshar Ali used to visit him for the Cheshire Home Road property. He introduced them with Rajdeep Kumar and got the property verified. After some time, with the consent of Punit Bhargava, he got the property registered in the name of Punit Bhargava and later this property was sold to Bishnu Kumar Agarwal at a consideration price of Rs. 1.78 crores. His statement also reveals that Rajdeep used to visit Chhavi Ranjan on his instructions for the landed properties. However, in his statement dated 15.08.2023, he started concealing facts regarding meeting between Afshar Ali, Md. Saddam Hussain and others with Chhavi Ranjan. It may be mentioned that Rajdeep is a person who worked under Prem Prakash as his employee and had visited the office of the accused Chhavi Ranjan on directions of Prem Prakash with the accused persons Afshar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion reveals that Rajesh Rai in connivance with Bharat Prasad, Md. Saddam Hussain, Afshar Ali, Imtiaz Ahmed and others prepared one forged deed of 1948 was prepared by the accused persons and on the basis of that a power of attorney was given in favour of Imtiaz Ahmed and Bharat Prasad. The other accomplice namely Lakhan Singh became the confirming party in the deed and they executed sale deed dated 06.02.2021 in favour of Punit Bhargava for an amount of Rs. 1,78,55,800/- which was registered as document no. 2021/RAN/1016/BK1/906 in book no. BK1, Vol. no. 112 from page no. 369 to 506 at the office of SRO, Ranchi. 9.7 Punit Bhargava further sold the said land to Bishnu Kumar Agarwal vide two sale deeds, both dated 01.04.2021, registered as document no. 2021/RAN/2784/BK1/2483 in book no. BK1, Vol. no. 316 from page no. 405 to 532 at the office of SRO, Ranchi (for an amount of Rs. 1,02,60,000/-) and document no. 2021/RAN/2783/BK1/2482 in book no. BK1, Vol. no. 316 from page no. 261 to 404 at the office of SRO, Ranchi (for an amount of Rs. 77,40,000). 9.8 Investigation further reveals that though the consideration amount in the deed between Imtiaz Ahmed and Bharat Prasad and Punit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve property acquired by Bishnu Kumar Agarwal was a government property (Khasmahal Land). Further, this property has been in possession of Nazarat Hussain & his families without any grounds and has been in their occupation. Later, this land was taken on lease by Ramchandra Mukherjee effective from the year 1985 and expired in the year 2014 after which, the lease of the above-stated was not renewed in name of any person. However, Bishnu Kumar Agarwal by concealing and suppressing the facts and by assistance of the accused Chhavi Ranjan and others purchased this Khasmahal land in illegal manner. Brief facts of the FIR and the reasons of the ECIR 10.1.1 An FIR bearing no. 399 of 2022 dated 08.09.2022 (RUD No. 03) was registered by Sadar Police Station, Ranchi, Jharkhand under section sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 447, 504, 506, 341, 323 & 34 of Indian Penal Code 1860. The FIR was registered on the directions of the Ld. Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in complaint case no. 3111 of 2021 passed by order dated 28.06.2022 for fraudulently grabbing one land measuring 1 acre at Plot no. 28, Khata No. 37, situated at village Gari, Cheshire Home Road, PS Sadar, Ranchi. 10.1.2 In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the Registrar of Assurances, Kolkata. Further, an FIR no. 137 of 2023 dated 10.05.2023 under section 120B, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of IPCP-M was also registered at Hare Street P.S, Kolkata on the report of the fact-finding committee of the Registrar of Assurances, Kolkata. 14 Specific Roles of the Accused persons in commission of offence of Money laundering 14.8 Prem Prakash, S/o Pramod Kumar Sinha (Accused no. 8) - The accused person was a party with the accused persons namely Afshar Ali @ Afsu Khan, Rajesh Rai, Lakhan Singh, Imtiaz Ahmed, Bharat Prasad, Punit Bhargava, Chhavi Ranjan and Bishnu Kumar Agarwal in acquisition of proceeds of crime in form of landed property admeasuring 1 acre situated at Plot no. 28, Khata no. 37, Village Gari, Cheshire Home Road, Ranchi initially in the name of Punit Bhargava and later assisting the accused person Bishnu Kumar Agarwal in its ultimate acquisition by fraudulent means. The accused being an accomplice of Bishnu Kumar Agarwal assisted him in acquiring the said one acre property by hatching a conspiracy and initially making Punit Bhargava as the owner of the said land. Later, this land was acquired by Bishnu Kumar Agarwal who is the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 016/BK1/906 in book no. BK1, Vol. no. 112 from page no. 369 to 506 the office of SRO, Ranchi. 60. The investigation further reveals that though the consideration amount in the deed between Imtiyaz Ahmed and Bharat Prasad and Punit Bhargava was shown as Rs. 1,78,55,800/-, but only an amount of Ra. 25 lacs was paid into the SBI Account no. 31100122501 of the dummy owner/accused Rajesh Rai on 12.02.2021. 61. It has come in the investigation on the instructions of the accused petitioner Prem Prakash, his accomplice Punit Bhargava further sold the said land to Bishnu Kumar Agarwal vide two sale deeds, both dated 01.04.2021, registered as document no. 2021/RAN/2784/BK1/2483 in book no. BK1, Vol. no. 316 from page no. 405 to 532 at the office of SRO, Ranchi for an amount of Rs. 1,02,60,000/-) and document no. 2021/RAN/2783/BK1/2482 in book no. BK1, Vol. no. 316 from page no. 261 to 404 at the office of SRO, Ranchi (for an amount of Rs. 77,40,000). 62. Punit Bhargav has admitted in his statement u/s 50 of the PMLA 2002 that he knows Bishnu Kumar Agarwal since March 2021 and on the direction of Prem Prakash, he sold 1 acre of land to Bishnu Kumar Agarwal. He further stated that he had pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39;s name has also surfaced in the case of fraudulent acquisition of a Defence property at Morabadi, admeasuring 4.55 acres. 68. Thus, prima-facie it appears that the present petitioner being an accomplice of Bishnu Kumar Agarwal was knowingly a party to the illegal acquisition of the above stated one acre property with other co-accused including his accomplice and co accused Chhavi Ranjan and Bishnu Kumar Agarwal. Further, it appears from the record that he also acquired Rs 1,78,20,000/- from the said Co accused Bishnu Kumar Agarwal through the firms of which he was the real beneficial owner and good amount of money was also transferred to the bank account of Jamin Enterprises, a firm whose beneficial owner is the present petitioner . 69. It is, thus, evident on the basis of the aforesaid material collected that prima-facie the involvement of the present petitioner in the alleged offence said to be committed under the provisions of the Act, 2002, cannot be denied. 70. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors. (supra) as under paragraph-284, has been held that the Authority under the 2002 Act, is to prosecute a person for offence of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g or claiming it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering and the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever. 75. Further, it is evident from the judicial pronouncement as discussed above that in order to constitute any property as proceeds of crime, it must be derived or obtained directly or indirectly by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. The explanation clarifies that the proceeds of crime include property, not only derived or obtained from scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence. Clause (u) also clarifies that even the value of any such property will also be the proceeds of crime and in the instant case from perusal of paragraph of the prosecution complaint it is evident that the petitioner is not only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nitiate a proceeding in case of any predicate/schedule offence within the territory of the State of Jharkhand is competent enough to initiate inquiry and accordingly, the inquiry has been initiated. 81. In the aforesaid context it is the considered view of this Court that the issue of jurisdiction is also the factual aspect which is to be looked into at the time of trial, as has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rana Ayyub Vrs. Directorate of Enforcement Through its Assistant Director, reported in (2023) 4 SCC 357. The relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid judgment are being quoted as under: "41. As we have pointed out earlier, the involvement of a person in any one or more of certain processes or activities connected with the proceeds of crime, constitutes the offence of money-laundering. These processes or activities include : (i) concealment; (ii) possession; (iii) acquisition; (iv) use; (v) projecting as untainted property; or (vi) claiming as untainted property. 43. In addition, the definition of the words "proceeds of crime" focuses on "deriving or obtaining a property" as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n a stand was taken that the second respondent was a history-sheeter, it was imperative on the part of the High Court to scrutinise every aspect and not capriciously record that the second respondent is entitled to be admitted to bail on the ground of parity. It can be stated with absolute certitude that it was not a case of parity and, therefore, the impugned order [Mitthan Yadav v. State of U.P., 2014 SCC OnLine All 16031] clearly exposes the non-application of mind. That apart, as a matter of fact it has been brought on record that the second respondent has been charge-sheeted in respect of number of other heinous offences. The High Court has failed to take note of the same. Therefore, the order has to pave the path of extinction, for its approval by this Court would tantamount to travesty of justice, and accordingly we set it aside. 26. Another aspect of the case which needs emphasis is the manner in which the High Court has applied the principle of parity. By its two orders both dated 21-12- 2020 [Pravinbhai Hirabhai Koli v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 2986] , [Khetabhai Parbatbhai Makwana v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 2988] , the High Court granted bail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Constitution. However, if any illegality or irregularity has been committed in favour of any individual or a group of individuals, or a wrong order has been passed by a judicial forum, others cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the higher or superior court for repeating or multiplying the same irregularity or illegality or for passing similar wrong order. Article 14 is not meant to perpetuate the illegality or irregularity. If there has been a benefit or advantage conferred on one or a set of people by any authority or by the court, without legal basis or justification, other persons could not claim as a matter of right the benefit on the basis of such wrong decision." 86. This Court in order to come to the conclusion as to whether the case of the petitioner is at par with Bishnu Kumar Agarwala who has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, needs to consider the allegation as has been surfaced in course of interrogation of the witness as accused persons as available in the ECIR for the purpose of clarification regarding the commission of the Act by Bishnu Kumar Agarwala and the petitioner. 87. This Court deems it fit and proper to refer herein the followin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of PMLA, 2002 and is accordingly liable to punished under section 4 of PMLA, 2002." 89. This Court, in order to come to the conclusion as to whether, the principle of parity is to be followed on the ground that the said Bishnu Kumar Agarwala has been granted bail also needs to consider the imputation against the present petitioner which has already been mentioned in preceding paragraph. 90. Now this court is adverting into facts of instant to decide the issue of parity in the backdrop of aforesaid settled legal ratio and further taken in to consideration the aforesaid settled position of law, thinks fit to refer herein distinguishable facts in the case of present petitioner to that the case of Bishnu Kumar Agarwala, who has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.01.2024 in B.A. No. 10166 of 2023. 91. On comparative assessment of the allegation as per the material collected in course of investigation as referred hereinabove, it is evident that against the said Bishnu Kumar Agarwala, the allegation of purchase of the land in question has been alleged and further allegation against him is that he is involved in the activities connected with the acquisition, possession, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counter affidavit dated 16.12.2023 has submitted that the accused petitioner, Prem Prakash is hatching conspiracies to derail investigation with other influential persons including the Superintendent and the Jailor, Birsa Munda Central Jail, Hotwar, Ranchi. It has also been stated that Prem Prakash initially tried to establish connections with the Maoists who are languishing in the Judicial Custody at Birsa Munda Central Jail, Hotwar, Ranchi for targeting the officials of the Directorate of Enforcement who are associated with cases linked to him. He has also established contacts with certain gangsters lodged in the Jail for the above purposes. 97. An objection has been raised on behalf of the petitioner by filing an interlocutory application being I.A. No. 1400 of 2024 regarding deletion of the statements made in the counter affidavit to the effect that the petitioner is trying to tamper with the evidence and also hatching conspiracy against the E.D. officials but this court vide order dated 16.02.2024, has rejected the said interlocutory application. 98. Therefore, it is evident from the discussion as made above the case of the petitioner is different to that of the said Bishnu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the prosecution for adducing additional evidence, inter alia, observed as under: (SCC p. 371, para 5) "5. ... The entire community is aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to book. A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the community. A disregard for the interest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the community in the system to administer justice in an even-handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white-collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the national economy and national interest." 24. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
