2022 (1) TMI 974 - HC - Money Laundering

Seeking grant of Bail - Action against the Chartered Accountant under PMLA for issuing bogus CA certificates - Money Laundering - shell entities - proceeds of crime - only allegation against the petitioner is that being a Chartered Accountant, without verifying the Bills of Entry and economic rationale of such large payments from paper entities had issued the certificates - HELD THAT - Admittedly, as of now the other accused are not arrested and the contention of learned Special Public Prosecutor that till such time, petitioner shall not be released from jail is not justifiable, because of the fact that custody of petitioner was already sought and no purpose will be served by detaining the petitioner in jail. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner, however on certain conditions. Petitioner / Accused shall be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of ₹ 20,000/- with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Nampally, Hyderabad. On such release, petitioner shall not leave Hyderabad until further orders - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Grant of bail under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Analysis:

1. Allegations and Prosecution's Case:
The petitioner, a Chartered Accountant, was accused of issuing Form 15CB certificates without verifying the original business or Bills of Entry, facilitating the generation of proceeds of crime and their concealment through remittances to obscure entities in Hong Kong. The prosecution argued that the petitioner knowingly assisted in money laundering activities, leading to his arrest and subsequent detention.

2. Defense Arguments:
The defense, represented by learned senior counsel, contended that the petitioner had issued certificates based on available bank statements and relevant material. It was argued that the petitioner's continued detention was unjustified, especially after completing the custody period, and that he should be granted bail as per the circumstances of the case.

3. Prosecution's Opposition:
The Special Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea, emphasizing the petitioner's alleged key role in a significant scam involving 1700 crores. The prosecution expressed concerns about the difficulty in apprehending other absconding accused if the petitioner was released on bail, despite acknowledging the completion of the custody period.

4. Judicial Decision:
After considering the arguments, the Court noted that the petitioner had been in custody for over 30 days, with the only allegation being the issuance of certificates without proper verification. Given that other accused were still at large and the petitioner had already undergone custody, the Court found it appropriate to grant bail under certain conditions to the petitioner.

5. Bail Conditions:
The Court allowed the Criminal Petition and ordered the petitioner's release on bail upon executing a personal bond of ?20,000 with two sureties of a like sum each. The petitioner was restricted from leaving Hyderabad without permission, required to report to the Directorate of Enforcement monthly, cooperate with the investigation, and appear as necessary upon advance notice.

In conclusion, the High Court of Telangana granted bail to the petitioner in a money laundering case, considering the circumstances, completion of custody, and the nature of allegations against him. The judgment highlighted the importance of bail conditions to ensure the petitioner's availability for further proceedings while balancing the interests of justice and individual rights.