9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1397X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... banks in the name of some shell Companies and puppet Companies is the allegation levelled against the petitioner. On the earlier occasion, viz., on 20.10.2022, this court, after dealing with the factual aspects in detail and after analysing the prima facie materials, declined to grant bail to the petitioner and thereby dismissed the petition in Crl.O.P.No.21728 of 2022. 4. The second bail petition in Crl.O.P.No.28591 of 2022 was filed by the petitioner, which also came to be dismissed by another learned Single Judge, by order dated 16.12.2022, finding that there is no change of circumstance for grant of bail. Whileso, the present petition, being a third one, has been filed seeking grant of bail. 5. This court, while considering the first petition, has elaborately dealt with the factual aspects and while denoting that the petitioner was appointed as Group CEO of Surana Group (SIL & SPL) on 27.05.2015 as approved in the Board of Directors of SIL dated 22.05.2015, enlisted his various acts pointing out the specific role alleged to have been played by the petitioner in the fraudulent conduct of affairs of SIL in connivance with his father Dinesh Chand Surana and dismissed the bail pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ducation in Chennai. He has got deep roots in the society thereby there is no probability of fleeing away from justice and thus, he is entitled to grant of bail. 7. Placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (SLP (Crl.) No.915 of 2023 dated 28.3.2023), the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the court, in the cases under Special Acts, have to address itself principally on two facts viz., likely guilt of the accused and the likelihood of them not committing any offence upon release. Also pointing out the decision of the Delhi High Court in Bindu Rana vs. Serious Fraud Investigation Office (Bail Appln. 3643 of 2022 dated 20.1.2023), he would submit that in a similar case, the Delhi High Court has granted bail. 8. The learned Senior Counsel would also rely on the decision of the Apex Court in Kiran Prakash Kulkarni vs. Enforcement Directorate and Another (2019 SCC OnLine 2189) to contend that the bail sought therein for the offence under Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which is akin to Section 212(6) of the Companies Act, 2013 was granted and thus, craves indul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l example and behave responsibly. The fraudulent activity in siphoning of pubic money by defrauding the financial institutions is unlike any other offence which could have been committed by sudden provocation as it is a well calculated one with the deep understanding as to the consequences and with the idealogy to conquer them. Therefore, if the court finds a prima facie case against the accused in such cases, it cannot come to a satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail as specified in Section 212 (6)(ii) of the Companies Act, 2013. 18. Though the petitioner claims to be an innocent and he was only the Vice President (Operations), from the materials submitted alongwith the Application, it is clear that the petitioner has played a major role in the affairs of the Company. He himself claims to have been appointed as a Group CEO only for the purpose of reviving and rehabilitating the Company. On one side, he claims such a responsibility of reviving and rehabilitating the Company and on the other side, he claims no knowledge when it comes to the part of fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umstance pleaded by the learned Senior Counsel for grant of bail is filing of a private complaint by the respondent on 9.9.2022 and cognizance having been taken by the court below. True that, as pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that bail has been granted in respect of the offences punishable under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 by the Apex Court in Kiran Prakash Kulkarni vs. Enforcement Directorate and Another (2019 SCC OnLine 2189) observing that charge sheet has been filed and it is true that Section 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002, which imposes twin conditions is akin to Section 212(6) of the Companies Act. 15. However, this court is of the view that the dictum laid down by a Full Bench of the Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and others vs. Union of India and others (2022 SCC OnLine SC 929) cannot be given a go-by which reads as under:- 404. As aforementioned, similar twin conditions have been provided in several other special legislations validity whereof has been upheld by this Court being reasonable and having nexus with the purposes and objects sought to be achieved by the concerned special le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
