9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1056X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr. Amal Chitale, Adv. Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, AOR Mr. R.K. Thakur, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Sharma, AOR ORDER Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The High Court has not complied with the requirement of Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 ( in short 'the PMLA'). While granting bail, the High Court has failed to comply with the requirement of condition (ii)of Section 45 of the PMLA. This Court in Gautam Kundu vs. Directorate of Enforcement (Prevention of Money Laundering Act), Government of India through Manoj Kumar, Assistant Director, Eastern Region [(2015)16 SCC 1] has laid down thus: 26. The learned Solicitor General submitted that Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents of this Court. 28. Before dealing with the application for bail on merit, it is to be considered whether the provisions of Section 45 of PMLA are binding on the High Court while considering the application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. There is no doubt that PMLA deals with the offence of money laundering and Parliament has enacted this law as per commitment of the country to the United Nations General Assembly. PMLA is a special statute enacted by the Parliament for dealing with money laundering. Section 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 clearly lays down that the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure will not affect any special statute or any local law. In other words, the provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... istent with the provisions of this Act. Therefore, the conditions enumerated in Section 45 of PMLA will have to be complied with even in respect of an application for bail made under Section 439 Cr.P.C. That coupled with the provisions of Section 24 provides that unless the contrary is proved, the Authority or the Court shall presume that proceeds of crime are involved in money laundering and the burden to prove that the proceeds of crime are not involved, lies on the appellant. xxx 34.We note that admittedly the complaint is filed against the appellant on the allegations of committing the offence punishable under Section 4 of PMLA. The contention raised on behalf of the appellant that no offence under Section 24 of the SEBI Act is ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
