9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1645X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turn up and did not comply with the aforesaid order. The pleadings made in the present petition are conspicuously silent about the rigor of non-appearance in view of aforesaid order except a meagre recital in para No.5 of the petition that the aforesaid writ petition was disposed of and a review application is pending consideration. In view of above, the conduct of the petitioner is not such which entitles him the extra ordinary relief of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. - CRM-M No.12008 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 11-5-2017 - Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, J. Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Ranjana Shahi, Sr. Panel Counsel and Mr. Suresh Batra, Spl. Public Prosecutor for the respondent. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omplaint was filed before the adjudicating authority. Provisional attachment of the properties of Raman Garg and Sheena Garg was made absolute. [4]. Learned counsel contended that Section 45 of the PMLA, 2002 is not applicable to the offences notified and Part 'B' of the Schedule in view of ratio laid down CRWP No.595 of 2016 titled 'Gorav Kathuria vs. Union of India and others (DB) as after the amendment in the year 2013, there is no bar in terms of Section 45(1) of the PMLA as the offences under Part 'A' prior to the year 2013 amendment was relatable to the offences like waging of war, NDPS cases and terrorist activities. The other scheduled offenes like vedging of war, NDPS cases and terrorist activities. The othe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence and petitioner is entitled to the anticipatory bail. The controversy with regard to the offence being cognizable or not is still pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP No.993 of 2016 titled 'Sharad Tikamdas Kabra vs. Union of India and others.' [7]. As against this learned counsel for the respondent vehemently submitted that the petitioner was involved along with Raman Kumar Garg in paper transactions and fake documentation in order to cheat the State exchequer, which is an offence against the State. The modus operandi of the petitioner can be deprecated in view of the fact that in similar matter involving ₹ 1.5 crores, petitioner is the beneficiary where fake companies have been floated. The proceedings in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngements for videography, but the petitioner did not appear on any of the occasion intentionally and even did not comply with the direction given by this Court. Petitioner deliberately avoided to join the investigation in order to escape from the proceedings. Summons were issued to the petitioner on nine occasions, but he did not turn up. While filing the present petition, the pleadings are conspicuously silent with regard to the rigor of non-appearance in the investigation, rather a reference was made in the para No.5 of the petition that a civil writ petition No.3314 of 2015 was filed by the petitioner, which was disposed of on 22.12.2015 and a review petition is pending before this Court. [9]. Learned counsel also stressed that a pers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nature of proof are totally different from a criminal proceedings under the Indian Penal Code. Further in the light of observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Dukhishyam Benupani, Asstt. Director, Enforcement Directoate vs. Arun Kumar Bajoria, MANU/SC/0872/1998, learned counsel submitted that any supervision made by the Court during inquiry or investigation under a Special Statute is uncalled for as the interference would impede the even course of inquiry and investigation into the serious allegations as in the present case, where huge amount has been swallowed by the petitioner and his son by illegal means. [11]. Both the parties have tried to highlight the number of issues by referring to the documents. [12]. At this stag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
