2023 (9) TMI 1477 - SCH - Money Laundering

Seeking grant of bail - Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - Jharkhand High Court in 2022 (4) TMI 1611 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT held that 'it is found that the conduct of the applicant in transferring the huge amount which was proceeds of the crime to the several bank accounts and also purchasing 53 vehicles revealed that there are reasonable ground to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence of money laundering and he is likely to commit the offence, if enlarged on bail.' - HELD THAT - There are no good ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court - SLP dismissed. Seeking to quash the order passed by the Special Judge, C.B.I. - Direction to the C.B.I. to defreeze the bank account - criminal conspiracy with the co-ccused - utilized/transferred/ misappropriated the amounts - It was held by Jharkhand High Court in 2020 (8) TMI 945 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT that i n the absence of any material to suggest that any bank account has been freezed during the investigation of the instant case no order to defreeze any bank account can be passed. No merit in the writ application. Accordingly, this writ application being without any merit is dismissed - HELD THAT - There are no reason to entertain this application, it is, accordingly, dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved: Dismissal of special leave petitions and pending application.

The Supreme Court, comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aravind Kumar and Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.V.N. Bhatti, considered the matter where the petitioner was represented by Mr. Ganesh Khanna, Adv., Mr. Gauraw Kumar, Adv., Mr. Satyabeer Singh, Adv., Mr. Himanshu Bhushan, AOR, and the respondent was represented by Mr. Suryaprakash V Raju, A.S.G., Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv., Ms. Archana Pathak Dave, Adv., Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Adv., Ms. Aakanksha Kaul, Adv., Mr. Shantnu Sharma, Adv., Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv., Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR, Mr. S.V. Raju, A.S.G., Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR, Ms. Preeti Rani, Adv., Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv., Ms. Sairica Raju, Adv., Ms. Deepabali Dutta, Adv., Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Adv. The Court held that there were no valid grounds to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, leading to the dismissal of the special leave petitions. Additionally, any pending application(s) were also disposed of accordingly. In a specific application, MA 746/2022 in SLP(Crl) No. 647/2022, the Court found no justification to entertain the application, resulting in its dismissal.