TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yed Arshad Alam, Advocate Mr. Syed Asfar Alam, Advocae Mr. Anjum Perveen, Advocate Mr. Prafulla Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. K.N.Singh, A.S.G Mr. Abhay Shankar Jha, AC to ASG CAV ORDER Heard Mr. Syed Arshad Alam, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. K.N. Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of India. Prosecution case is as:- earlier the Prosecution Complaint No. 02 of 2018 in the instant case had been filed against the 10 accused persons, including the officials of the Bank of India, G.B. Road, Gaya and further investigation was in progress. First supplementary Complaint No. 11 of 2018 had been filed against 4 accused persons and on further investigation this supplementary complaint filed by the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement under Section 45 of the PML Act and the cognizance has been taken on 05.06.2020 for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (hereinafter in short referred to as PML Act ) against the 12 accused persons, including the present petitioner. This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused petitioner, namely Paras Kumar Bansal, who ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... behalf of the petitioner further submits that it has been alleged that the petitioner received money amount to Rs. 1,04,02,350/- originating from bank accounts held with Bank of India, G.B. Road, Gaya inA/c No. 01848400000212 of M/s Paras Lubricant Ltd. held with Yes Bak, Pritampura, New Delhi during the period from July 2016 to October 2016. He submits that the petitioner has received this money from M/s Sunil trading Company and M/s Sandeep traders in return of goods sold by them. It is next submitted that at the time of questioning the petitioner had produced the list of purchase order and payment received to the complainant but the prosecution has failed to disclose the name and now he apprehends his arrest in this manifested case. He further submits that the petitioner is doing his business for a long time but not a single case has been lodged against him previously by any financial institutions. He submits that the respondents has failed to disclose the fact that the payment of Rs.15,00,000/- made to the petitioner on 08.07.2016 after being layered through the bank A/c No. 113805501029 in the name of Sunil Trading Company held with ICICI Bank, Fatehpuri New Delhi was not a o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sales invoice and other documents in the name of these firms and in course of investigation it has been found that these firms are fake and non-existence and M/s Paras Lubricants, Delhi has no business transactions with these firms since April 2017 i.e. after initiation of investigation under PMLA . It is logical to conclude that the M/s Paras Lubricants Ltd., New Delhi, is not involved in any genuine business transaction in respect of Rs.104.02 lakh received in the bank account mentioned above. Regarding receipt of Rs. 104.02 lakh during July 2016 to October 2016, in the bank account of his firm M/s Paras Lubricants Ltd., New Delhi, Shri Paras Kumar Bansal has no credible, verifiable explanation. Thus, M/s Paras Lubricants Ltd., New Delhi, is consciously and knowingly involved in concealment, transfer and acquisition of proceeds of crime and is in possession of property involved in money laundering. This is depicted schematically below:- Learned A.S.G. further submits that the petitioner Proprietor of M/s Paras Lubricants Ltd., New Delhi could not produce the copy of purchase orders in respect of transaction made with the firms namely M/s Sandeep Traders, New Delhi and M/s Sunil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iament has enacted this law as per commitment of the country to the United Nations General Assembly. PMLA is a special statute enacted by Parliament for dealing with money laundering. Section 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 clearly lays down that the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure will not affect any special statute or any local law. In other words, the provisions of any special statute will prevail over the general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure in case of any conflict. 29. Section 45 of PMLA starts with a non obstante clause which indicates that the provisions laid down in Section 45 of PMLA will have overriding effect on the general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure in case of conflict between them. Section 45 of PMLA imposes the following two conditions for grant of bail to any person accused of an offence punishable for a term of imprisonment of more than three years under Part A of the Schedule of PMLA: (I) That the prosecutor must be given an opportunity to oppose the application for bail; and (ii) That the court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused person is not guilty of such off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bench decision in Kartar Singh and other observations suggestive of doubting the perception of Parliament in regard to the seriousness of the offence of money-laundering, including about it posing serious threat to the sovereignty and integrity of the country. (c) the provisions in the form of Section 45 of the 2002 Act, as applicable post amendment of 2018, is reasonable and has direct nexus with the purposes and objects sought to be achieved by the 2002 Act and does not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness or unreasonableness. (d) as regards the prayer for grant of bail, irrespective of the nature of proceedings, including those under Section 438 of the 1973 Code or even upon invoking the jurisdiction of Constitutional Courts, the underlying principles and rigous of Section 45 may apply. He further submits that the petitioner is deliberately evading the process of law and he has deliberately avoided several summons issued under Section 50 of the PMLA and had not disclosed the truth during the investigation and hence he does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
