9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (1) TMI 1542 - HC - Money LaunderingSeeking grant of Regular bail - Money Laundering - scheduled/predicate offence - proceeds of crime - illegally collecting commissions and supplying unaccounted liquor to the government liquor shops - satisfaction of twin test under Section 45 of the PMLA 2002 or not - HELD THAT - In the present case the applicant was involved in the criminal acts of the syndicate and that he received commission from the liquor suppliers. However no recovery of unaccounted money has been made in this regard and as per the investigating agency the investigation is pending hence a conclusive determination of their role is yet to be made. On perusal of the records it appears that the co-accused Trilok Singh Dhillon was a liquor. In the case in hand considering the fact that the charges levelled against the applicant are grave and a serious threat to societal harmony. On perusal of the aforesaid provisions of law and judgment passed by the Apex Court in the matter of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary Vs. Union of India and Others 2022 (7) TMI 1316 - SUPREME COURT (LB) it is clear that the offence under PMLA 2002 is a separate and distinct offence. PMLA 2002 deals with the proceeds of crime which has been obtained by the accused by committing schedule offences. Accused possess conceals and acquire tainted property or money claiming it to be untainted and use the proceeds of crime. Said act of accused in dealing with ill gotten money or property constitutes separate and distinct offence from earlier offence committed to acquire money. It is important to note that the twin conditions provided under Section 45 of the 2002 Act though restrict the right of the accused to grant of bail but it cannot be said that the conditions provided under Section 45 impose absolute restraint on the grant of bail. The discretion vests in the Court which is not arbitrary or irrational but judicial guided by the principles of law as provided under Section 45 of the Act 2002. What is required is to prima facie consider the material available on record to satisfy itself and to enable it to reasonably form an opinion to believe that the applicant is not guilty of the offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence on bail as enshrined in Section 45 of the PMLA. It is also required to consider the nature and gravity of the accusation severity of the punishment in the event of conviction danger of the accused absconding or fleeing character behaviour means position and standing of the accused the likelihood and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being influenced and danger of course of justice being defeated by grant of bail. Conclusion - The applicant is in possession of the Proceeds of Crime of about 27.2 crores which was used in creation of various Fixed Deposits of principal amount totalling to Rs. 27.2 crores in the name of his companies ie. M/s. Petrosun Bio Refineries Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Dhillon City Mall Pvt. Ltd. It is in the aforesaid backdrop considering the material available on record including the money transactions in the FDR accounts of the applicant and its use by the applicant through his firms/companies for all the reasons aforesaid this Court is unable to persuade itself to form a prima facie satisfaction in terms of Section 45 of the PMLA at this stage and further that the prosecution complaint has been filed against the applicant this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. The prayer for bail made by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (BNSS) read with Section 45 of the PMLA 2002 for the offences under Section 3 4 of the PMLA 2002 is hereby rejected - bail application dismissed.
ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED
The core legal issues considered in this judgment are:
ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS 1. Bail Application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, and Section 45 of PMLA, 2002 Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The bail application is governed by Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and Section 45 of the PMLA, 2002. The PMLA imposes twin conditions for granting bail, requiring the court to be satisfied that the accused is not guilty of the offence and is unlikely to commit any offence while on bail. Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The court emphasized the stringent nature of Section 45 of the PMLA, which necessitates a careful assessment of the accused's involvement in money laundering and the likelihood of reoffending. The court referenced the Supreme Court's interpretation in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, which upheld the twin conditions post the 2018 amendment. Application of Law to Facts: The court evaluated the applicant's alleged role in money laundering, specifically his involvement in the safekeeping and concealment of proceeds of crime through his companies. The court found that the applicant's actions fell within the ambit of money laundering under Section 3 of the PMLA. Conclusions: The court concluded that the applicant did not satisfy the twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA, as there were reasonable grounds to believe he was guilty of the offence and might commit further offences if released on bail. 2. Applicant's Health Conditions as a Ground for Bail Relevant Legal Framework: The court considered the proviso to Section 45 of the PMLA, which allows bail for individuals who are sick or infirm. Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The court assessed the applicant's health claims, including diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart blockage, but found no evidence of serious ailments that would warrant bail on medical grounds. Conclusions: The court determined that the applicant's health conditions did not justify bail, as they were not severe enough to meet the criteria under the proviso to Section 45. 3. Gravity of Economic Offences and Possession of Proceeds of Crime Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The court considered the nature of economic offences, referencing the Supreme Court's stance in Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy and other cases, which emphasize the seriousness of economic crimes. Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The court highlighted the significant impact of economic offences on society and the economy, noting that the applicant's actions involved substantial amounts of money linked to criminal activities. Application of Law to Facts: The court examined the evidence of the applicant's possession of proceeds of crime, including inflated invoices and unsecured loans, which were used to create fixed deposits. Conclusions: The court found that the applicant's involvement in economic offences and possession of proceeds of crime justified the denial of bail, given the potential threat to societal and economic stability. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS
Final Determination: The court rejected the bail application, holding that the applicant failed to meet the criteria under Section 45 of the PMLA, and the seriousness of the offences warranted continued detention.
|
