9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 1429 - HC - Money LaunderingSeeking grant of regular bail - Money Laundering - conglomeration of illegal betting websites which are hosted from abroad - Section 45 of the PMLA - HELD THAT - As per provisions of Section 45 of the PMLA apart from providing Public Prosecutor opportunity to oppose bail application filed by the applicant two conditions are required to be fulfilled i.e. firstly the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that applicant is not guilty of such offence and secondly he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. In the case of Satish Jaggi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh 2007 (4) TMI 775 - SUPREME COURT it has been held that at the stage of granting of bail the Court can only go into the question of prima facie case established for granting bail it cannot go into the question of credibility and reliability of witnesses put up by the prosecution. The question of credibility and reliability of prosecution witnesses can only be tested during trial . Statement of applicant under Section 50 of the PMLA was recorded on 27-8-2023. He has admitted in his statement that he has visisted Dubai thrice in the year 2020 2021 and 2022. He has also admitted that in all three occasions he met there with Sourabh Chandrakar and Ravi Uppal who are said to be king pin/promoters of instant money laundering case - It is also revealed that time frame of applicant travel seems to be orchestrated to facilitate the applicant to attend a high profile Mahadev Online Book events held in September 2022 which suggests a close affliation between applicant and the promoters of Mahadev Online Book app who not only sponsored his journey but also handlled Visa arrangement and other services and thereby he has been benefited from proceeds of illegal betting activity. All these facts prima facie connect involvement of applicant in present crime so far as his alleged role of facilitator / supplier is concerned. It has not been brought on record by the Enforcement Directorate as to when where and how much amount was received by the applicant and supplied by him. Chandra Bhushan Verma ASI has been prosecuted in first prosecution complaint as accused No. 4. As per his statement recorded by Enforcement Directorate under Section 50 of the PMLA on 22-8-2023 he has stated indulgence of applicant with regard to collection of cash amount from hawala operators of Nagpur and handing over a part of collected amount as protection money to various police officers. He has also said that applicant was in direct touch with Mahadev Online Betting app promoters and he along with other persons visited Dubai in order to meet with Sourabh Chandrakar and Ravi Uppal which has also been admitted by applicant in his statement recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA. Conclusion - A prima facie case exists against the applicant based on his involvement in the money laundering network and the evidence presented. The applicant s bail application is rejected due to the lack of satisfaction of the conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA. Bail application dismissed.
1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED
The core legal issues considered in this judgment are: (i) Whether the applicant should be granted bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with the alleged offenses under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). (ii) Whether the applicant's alleged involvement in the money laundering activities related to the Mahadev Online Betting App constitutes a prima facie case against him. (iii) Whether the conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA for granting bail are satisfied, specifically, whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is not guilty and is unlikely to commit any offense while on bail. 2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS (i) Relevant legal framework and precedents: The legal framework involves Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for bail and Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA, which pertain to money laundering offenses. Section 45 of the PMLA requires that the court be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and is unlikely to commit any offense while on bail. The court referenced precedents such as Sanjay Jain Vs. Enforcement Directorate and Vijay Madanlal Choudhary Vs. Union of India to guide its decision-making process. (ii) Court's interpretation and reasoning: The court evaluated whether the applicant fulfilled the conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA. It considered the applicant's alleged activities, including his visits to Dubai, purchase of land, and involvement in the money laundering network, as indicative of his involvement in the crime. The court emphasized that at the bail stage, it is not required to conclusively determine guilt but to assess if there is a prima facie case against the applicant. (iii) Key evidence and findings: The applicant's visits to Dubai, his association with the promoters of the Mahadev Online Betting App, and financial transactions through his wife's bank account were key pieces of evidence. The court noted that the applicant admitted to visiting Dubai and meeting with the alleged promoters of the betting app. Financial transactions linked to proceeds of crime were identified in the bank account of the applicant's wife. (iv) Application of law to facts: The court applied the legal standards under Section 45 of the PMLA and determined that the applicant's actions and the evidence presented did not satisfy the conditions for granting bail. The court found that the applicant's involvement in the money laundering network was prima facie established through his activities and financial transactions. (v) Treatment of competing arguments: The applicant argued that his involvement was based on coerced statements and that the financial transactions were legitimate. The prosecution countered with evidence of the applicant's connections to the money laundering network and the suspicious nature of the financial transactions. The court found the prosecution's evidence more compelling at this stage. (vi) Conclusions: The court concluded that there was a prima facie case against the applicant and that the conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA were not met. Therefore, the application for bail was rejected. 3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS The court held that: "At the stage of considering a bail application under the PMLA, the Court has to bear in mind the following aspects: whether the accused possessed the requisite mens rea; the words used in Section 45 of the 2002 Act are 'reasonable grounds for believing' which means the Court has to see only if there is a genuine case against the accused and the prosecution is not required to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt." The court established that a prima facie case existed against the applicant based on his involvement in the money laundering network and the evidence presented. The final determination was that the applicant's bail application was rejected due to the lack of satisfaction of the conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA.
|
