2023 (9) TMI 1416 - HC - Money Laundering

Seeking release of the applicant on bail - Money Laundering - proceeds of crime - large scale financial loss bunglings - loss irregularities - misappropriation of MGNREGS funds - HELD THAT - The aforesaid application was disposed off directing that if the applicant appear before the trial court within three weeks from the date of the order and apply for bail, the same shall be decided in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ANR. 2021 (10) TMI 1296 - SUPREME COURT . The applicant has not availed the aforesaid remedy and he has not appeared before the trial court in spite of a non bailable warrant being in existence since prior of 11.08.2023. The applicant is not entitled to be receive discretion of this Court by granting the him pre arrest bail - this anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the application for release on bail in a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and the non-appearance of the applicant before the trial court despite a non-bailable warrant.

Bail Application Issue:
The applicant filed for release on bail in Complaint Case no. 126 of 2023 ECIR No: 01/ALSZO/2014 under Sections 3/4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which was registered based on a complaint by the Directorate of Enforcement against seven persons, including the applicant, for financial irregularities and misappropriation of funds leading to proceeds of crimes.

Non-Appearance Issue:
The respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding a previous application under Section 482 No. 24159 of 2022, where the applicants expressed readiness to appear before the court and apply for bail. However, the applicant did not avail this opportunity and did not appear before the trial court despite a non-bailable warrant being in existence since before 11.08.2023.

Judgment:
The court noted the applicant's failure to avail the opportunity to appear before the trial court despite the existing non-bailable warrant. Due to this conduct, the court held that the applicant is not entitled to discretionary relief in the form of pre-arrest bail. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was rejected.