2023 (6) TMI 1005 - HC - Money Laundering

Money Laundering - alleged collection of huge amount of money from the public by M/s. Fine Indisales Private Limited and of misappropriation thereof - HELD THAT - The Court below could have issued a bailable warrant at that stage if it was not inclined to grant time or had any reason to believe that the Petitioners were avoiding appearance, but directing issuance of N.B.Ws. straight away cannot at all be held to be justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is stated that the Petitioners were engaged in marketing jobs at different places of Raipur and Mumbai and therefore, could not personally appear. This is a reasonable explanation for non-appearance, which ought to have been considered by the Court below. Even the fact that the Petitioners were never arrested during investigation and prosecution does not allege that they had not cooperated with the investigating agency, does not seem to have been considered by the Court at all. Therefore, there seems to be no justified reason to take coercive steps against the Petitioners for their appearance. This Court is strongly persuaded to hold that the impugned order in so far as it relates to the direction for issuance of N.B.W. cannot be sustained in the eye or law - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment involves the challenge to an order passed by the Addl. District Judge-cum-Special Judge, C.B.I. Court-I, regarding rejection of petitions seeking time for appearance and issuance of N.B.Ws. against the accused persons.

Details of the judgment:
The petitioners sought to challenge the order dated 17th April, 2023, where N.B.Ws. were issued against them for not appearing despite seeking time. The petitioners, accused in a case involving misappropriation of public money, were never arrested during investigation and fully cooperated. The court heard arguments from both sides, with the petitioner's counsel arguing against the issuance of N.B.Ws. at this stage. The opposing counsel contended that the petitioners intentionally avoided appearing. The court referred to legal precedents emphasizing the need for judicious issuance of N.B.Ws. and the importance of personal liberty.

The court found that the summons issued with a conditional N.B.W. clause was not justified. The petitioners appearing through their lawyer and seeking time did not amount to willful avoidance. The court held that the reasons for non-appearance, such as the petitioners' engagement in marketing jobs in different cities, should have been considered. The lack of arrest during investigation and full cooperation with authorities were not taken into account by the lower court. Consequently, the court ruled that the direction for N.B.W. issuance was not legally justified and quashed the order.

In conclusion, the CRLMCs were allowed, and the order for N.B.W. issuance against the petitioners was quashed. The lower court was directed to set a new date for the petitioners' appearance.