9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner and had given as a loan an amount of Rupees One Crore to co-accused-Surya Sonal Singh. The veracity of the balance sheet has sufficiently been substantiated by the information received under the Right to Information Act and the same also finds mention in the order of the adjudicating authority at clause 8.12. The adjudicating authority on proper assessment of the documentary evidence as well as the statement of the accused recorded under section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act had released the property attached with respect to all the live units. It is also to be noted herein that the petitioner or for that matter other accused Surya Sonal Singh and Ankita Singh were never made accused in the main offence, which w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 4285 2016, against which the petitioner had moved the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the anticipatory bail application was disposed of on 19.7.2017. Prosecution story in brief is that Kamlesh Kumar Singh, who was a Minister in the Government of Jharkhand, while holding the post of a public servant had amassed wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income. It is alleged that an investigation was conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation in relation to a schedule offence and chargesheet was submitted against Shri Kamlesh Kumar Singh and his wife Smt. Madhu Singh under section 9 of the Indian Penal Code read with sections 13(2) and 13 (1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act with the allegation that the accused Kamlesh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Act wherein she had confirmed of giving loan to her brother of Rupees One Crore in two installments of ₹ 50 lacs each. Investigation also revealed that the said loan was never reflected in Income tax Returns of Ankita Singh. In view of the statement of Ankita Singh, accused Narendra Mohan Singh, present petitioner, was summoned and after appearance he admitted that he had advanced a loan of ₹ 1,26,63.000 to his wife namely Ankita Singh. It was concluded on examination of the accused persons as well as the documents that the deposits in cash made in Income tax Return have been suppressed intentionally so as to disguise the source of the funds. Since explanation submitted by the accused persons were not satisfactory, a suppl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... senior counsel submits that it was Kamlesh Kumar Singh, who was alleged to have committed a schedule offence but the petitioner was never involved in commission of such offence. Learned senior counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the Income tax Return of Ankita Singh, which carries a balance sheet, which reveals that unsecured loan was taken from Narendra Mohan Singh, present petitioner for an amount of ₹ 1,22,31.000 and an amount of Rupees One Crore was advanced to Surya Sonal Singh. Learned senior counsel has also referred to the information obtained from the Income tax Department under the Right to Information Act to substantiate his contention that balance sheet was indeed filed. It has been stated that only on assumpti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arty has referred to the supplementary complaint and has submitted that the petitioner had never disclosed about the cash deposits only to disguise the source of the funds. He has further submitted that reflections made in the Income tax Return do not disclose the actual picture and the transactions, which have been shown, are only to mislead the investigation. It has also been submitted that unsecured loan of Rupees One Crore, which was taken by Surya Sonal Singh, petitioner in B.A. No. 6583 of 2017, from the wife of the petitioner, has never been disclosed and therefore the cash flow statement is not reliable. Learned counsel submits that statement of bank account of the petitioner and other accused persons shows a dubious pattern as the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mation received under the Right to Information Act and the same also finds mention in the order of the adjudicating authority at clause 8.12. The adjudicating authority on proper assessment of the documentary evidence as well as the statement of the accused recorded under section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act had released the property attached with respect to all the live units. It is also to be noted herein that the petitioner or for that matter other accused Surya Sonal Singh and Ankita Singh were never made accused in the main offence, which was investigated by the C.B.I. Thus, the allegation made in the supplementary complaint seems to have been sufficiently diluted by virtue of the order passed by the adjudicating author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
