Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + HC Money Laundering - 2024 (3) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (3) TMI 357 - HC - Money Laundering


Issues Involved:
1. Bail application under Section 439 Cr.PC and twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA.
2. Allegations and evidence against the petitioner.
3. Arguments by petitioner's counsel.
4. Arguments by respondent's counsel.
5. Court's analysis and decision.

Summary:

1. Bail Application and Twin Conditions under PMLA:
The petitioner, a former Transport Minister, sought bail after being arrested for offences under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and remanded to judicial custody. The court had to determine if the petitioner satisfied the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA and the requirements under Section 439 Cr.PC.

2. Allegations and Evidence:
Between 2011 and 2016, the petitioner allegedly conspired with his assistants and brother to collect money in exchange for job opportunities in the Transport Department. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) registered a case based on these allegations and subsequent investigations. The evidence included electronic records (CF-29, CF-27, CF-116), statements under Section 50 of PMLA, and email communications.

3. Arguments by Petitioner's Counsel:
The petitioner's counsel argued that there were changes in circumstances since the previous bail applications, including the petitioner's resignation as Minister. They contended that the investigation was complete, and the petitioner was willing to comply with bail conditions. They challenged the probative value of the electronic evidence, citing discrepancies and tampering allegations. They also argued that the statements recorded under Section 50 of PMLA were not strong enough to deny bail.

4. Arguments by Respondent's Counsel:
The respondent's counsel maintained that the petitioner still wielded influence despite resigning and could tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. They argued that the petitioner had not satisfied the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA. They defended the integrity of the electronic evidence and the statements recorded, asserting that the materials were genuine and sufficient to deny bail.

5. Court's Analysis and Decision:
The court found that the petitioner had not satisfied the twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA. The materials, including CF-29/20 and CF-27/21, were deemed prima facie genuine. The court noted that the petitioner's influence persisted, posing a risk of tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses. Considering the larger public interest and the nature of the allegations, the court dismissed the bail petition. The court directed the Special Court to dispose of the pending case within three months, conducting the trial on a day-to-day basis.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates