9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (3) TMI 685 - HC - Money LaunderingSeeking grant of regular bail - Money Laundering - proceeds of crime - prima facie evidence indicating the applicant s involvement in money laundering activities - applicability of Section 45 of the PMLA 2002 - HELD THAT - The Hon ble Supreme Court in the matter of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary case 2022 (7) TMI 1316 - SUPREME COURT (LB) has held that The Court is only required to place its view based on probability on the basis of reasonable material collected during the investigation and the said view will not be taken into consideration by the Trial Court in recording its finding of the guilt or acquittal during trial which is based on the evidence adduced during the trial. In the case of Satish Jaggi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh 2007 (4) TMI 775 - SUPREME COURT the Hon ble Supreme Court has 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. It is not acceptable that the present applicant did not know about the transactions that the amount utilized by him not comes from Mahadev online book. Denial by the accused itself is not sufficient to consider prima facie that there is no mens rea of the applicant for the said offence under the PMLA-2002. Considering the nature of allegation against the present applicant and also the material collected during the investigation and further the gravity of the offence the benefit of the judgments cited by the learned counsel for the applicant cannot be extended to him for releasing him on bail at this stage as the facts and circumstances of the present case and the allegation against the applicant is different than the facts and circumstances of the cases cited by learned counsel for the applicant. Conclusion - Considering the role of the applicant in the ensuing money laundering case of proceeds of crime in the Mahadev Book App it is found that there is sufficient evidence collected by the ED/respondent to prima facie show the involvement of the applicant in the offence of money laundering as defined under Section 3 of the PMLA 2002. It is an organized crime having various facets of its complexion therefore further considering the provisions of Section 45 of the PMLA 2002 this Court is satisfied that there is reasonable ground for believing that the applicant is involved in the offence and he is likely to commit any other offence while on bail it is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is dismissed.
1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED
The core legal issues considered in this judgment include:
2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS Issue 1: Entitlement to Bail under PMLA-2002 The relevant legal framework involves Section 3 of the PMLA-2002, which defines the offence of money laundering, and Section 4, which prescribes the punishment. Section 45 of the PMLA sets stringent conditions for granting bail, requiring the court to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. The Court interpreted these provisions by emphasizing the need for a prima facie case against the accused rather than a detailed examination of merits at the bail stage. The Court relied on precedents such as Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India and Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. CBI, which underscore the gravity of economic offences and the necessity of a different approach in bail matters. Key evidence included the seizure of Rs. 5.39 Crores from the applicant, his alleged role as a liaisoner with politicians, and his connections with the main perpetrators of the Mahadev Online Book. The Court found that these factors collectively indicated a prima facie case of involvement in money laundering. The Court concluded that the applicant's involvement in the offence was sufficiently demonstrated by the evidence, and thus, the stringent conditions of Section 45 were not met to grant bail. Issue 2: Prima Facie Evidence of Involvement in Money Laundering The Court examined the evidence presented by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which included the applicant's travel records, cash seizures, and communications with key figures in the Mahadev Online Book operation. The ED argued that the applicant was actively involved in handling illegal funds and facilitating the operations of the betting syndicate. The Court considered the applicant's defense, which claimed a lack of direct evidence linking him to the seized cash and questioned the credibility of the ED's investigation. However, the Court found the ED's evidence compelling, particularly the applicant's connections with the syndicate's main operators and the large sums of money involved. The Court applied the law to the facts by determining that the applicant's actions fell within the definition of money laundering under Section 3 of the PMLA-2002, as the funds in question were proceeds of crime. Competing arguments were addressed by weighing the ED's evidence against the applicant's claims of innocence and lack of direct involvement. The Court ultimately sided with the ED, citing the seriousness of the allegations and the applicant's potential to commit further offences if released on bail. The conclusion was that there was sufficient prima facie evidence of the applicant's involvement in money laundering, justifying his continued detention. 3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS The Court reiterated the principle that economic offences, particularly those involving money laundering, require a stringent approach in bail matters due to their impact on the national economy and public interest. Significant legal reasoning included the interpretation of Section 45 of the PMLA-2002, with the Court stating: "The Court is only required to place its view based on probability on the basis of reasonable material collected during the investigation and the said view will not be taken into consideration by the Trial Court in recording its finding of the guilt or acquittal during trial." The Court emphasized the need for a "delicate balance" between the presumption of innocence and the serious nature of the allegations, noting that the applicant's involvement in an organized crime syndicate was sufficiently established by the evidence. The final determination was that the applicant's bail application was rejected due to the presence of reasonable grounds to believe his involvement in the offence and the likelihood of committing further offences if released.
|
