2025 (1) TMI 10 - HC - Money Laundering

Seeking grant of bail - Money Laundering - collecting illegal bribes and controlling the high level management of important State Departments and State Public Sector undertakings - HELD THAT - In the case in hand, the factors enumerating in the case which should be taken in consideration while granting or refusing bail in a non-bailable case are that there are three charge sheets filed against the applicant in relation to the same allegations, 457 witnesses have been cited and more than 13,000 pages have been filed before the Special Court (PC) Raipur. It is trite that the court while considering an application seeking bail, is not required to weigh the evidence collected by the investigating agency meticulously, nonetheless, the court should keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of evidence collected in support thereof, the severity of the punishment prescribed for the alleged offences, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witness being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State etc. Though, the findings recorded by the Court while granting or refusing bail would be tentative in nature, nonetheless the Court is expected to express prima facie opinion for granting or refusing to grant bail which would demonstrate an application of mind, particularly dealing with the economic offences - 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. As has been held in catena of decisions, the economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country. Undoubtedly, economic offences have serious repercussions on the development of the country as a whole. There is no denial to the fact that the economic offences constitute a separate class of their own, but trite it is that presumption of innocence is one of the bedrocks on which the criminal jurisprudence rests. Time and again, Apex Court has reiterated the need to integrate the right of investigating agencies to have effective interrogation of the accused with the right of liberty of the accused. In the instant case, the offence as alleged against the accused persons is very serious involving deep-rooted planning in which, huge financial loss is caused to the State exchequer. The gravity for the said purpose will have to be gathered from the facts and circumstances arising in each case. Keeping in view the consequences that would befall on the society in cases of financial irregularities, it has been held that even economic offences would fall under the category of grave offence and in such circumstance while considering the application for bail in such matters, the Court will have to deal with the same, being sensitive to the nature of allegation made against the accused - In that regard what is also to be kept in perspective is that even if the allegation is one of grave economic offence, it is not a rule that bail should be denied in every case but the consideration will have to be on case-to-case basis on the facts involved therein. Conclusion - The applicant's bail application was denied due to the gravity of the charges and the potential risks associated with his release. The court found sufficient grounds to believe that the applicant was involved in a criminal syndicate, justifying further judicial proceedings. The prayer for grant of bail to the applicant is liable to be rejected and it is hereby rejected.

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal questions considered in this judgment include:

Whether the applicant should be granted bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with the alleged offences under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Whether the allegations against the applicant constitute a prima facie case of involvement in a criminal syndicate engaged in illegal liquor trade and corruption.
Whether there is sufficient evidence to justify the continued detention of the applicant.
Whether the applicant poses a flight risk or is likely to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses if granted bail.
Whether the applicant's right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution has been violated due to prolonged detention without trial.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1: Grant of Bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

Legal Framework and Precedents: The court considered the principles of bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., including the presumption of innocence, the right to liberty, and the need to ensure a fair trial.
Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The court examined the severity of the charges, the potential impact on the state exchequer, and the applicant's alleged role in the syndicate.
Key Evidence and Findings: The court noted the existence of multiple charge sheets, witness statements, and digital evidence linking the applicant to the alleged offences.
Application of Law to Facts: The court applied the principles of bail, considering the seriousness of the economic offences and the potential for the applicant to abscond or tamper with evidence.
Treatment of Competing Arguments: The applicant's counsel argued for bail based on medical grounds, lack of direct evidence, and the right to liberty, while the prosecution highlighted the gravity of the offences and the risk of interference with the investigation.
Conclusions: The court concluded that the applicant's involvement in a serious economic offence posed a significant risk, justifying the denial of bail.

Issue 2: Prima Facie Case of Involvement in Criminal Syndicate

Legal Framework and Precedents: The court considered the elements of offences under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The court assessed the evidence presented by the prosecution, including witness statements and digital records.
Key Evidence and Findings: The court found that the evidence suggested a well-organized conspiracy involving the applicant and others.
Application of Law to Facts: The court applied the legal standards to determine the existence of a prima facie case against the applicant.
Treatment of Competing Arguments: The applicant's counsel contested the reliability of the evidence, while the prosecution maintained its credibility.
Conclusions: The court held that there was a prima facie case against the applicant, warranting further investigation and trial.

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

Verbatim Quotes of Crucial Legal Reasoning:

"The grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the opportunity of securing a fair trial."
"Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail."

Core Principles Established:

The seriousness and potential impact of economic offences necessitate a cautious approach to granting bail.
The presumption of innocence must be balanced with the need to prevent interference with the investigation and trial.

Final Determinations on Each Issue:

The applicant's bail application was denied due to the gravity of the charges and the potential risks associated with his release.
The court found sufficient grounds to believe that the applicant was involved in a criminal syndicate, justifying further judicial proceedings.

← Previous Next →