9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,95,47,971/- which is disproportionate to his known sources of income. It has been alleged that Sri Manoj Singh had acquired proceeds of crime and placed the said proceeds of crime in the form of fixed deposit and other deposits. In the commission of the said offence, Sri Manoj Kumar Singh had been intentionally assisted by the other accused persons. Based on the aforesaid allegation, a complaint case was lodged which was registered as ECIR/02/PAT/11/AD in which cognizance has been taken for the offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The background facts prior to the institution of the complaint is that on 15.10.2009 and 21.10.2009, searches were conducted by the Income Tax Department at Ranchi and in the village of Sri Manoj Kumar, in course of which there was a recovery of 169 fixed deposit receipts investing Rs. 12,54,45, 499/- with Uttar Pradesh Chhetriya Gramin Bank, Magarpal, Murtaza branch, Chhapra; 24 fixed deposits worth Rs. 12,75,000/- invested with United Bank of India, R. K. Mission Extension Counter, Morhabadi, Ranchi; Rs. 4,49,000/- in the savings bank account of Sri Manoj Kumar in United Bank of India, R. K. Mission Extension Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the charges taken by him and which has been shown in the Income Tax return for the financial year 2005-06. It has been submitted that the petitioner has given suitable explanation about his income and it cannot be said that the income generated by the petitioner was from the proceeds of crime. Mr. Rajendra Krishna has also referred to the case of "Shri P. Chidambaram Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation" reported in 2020 (1) JBCJ 28 (SC) and has stated that the criteria laid down for grant of bail does not disentitle the petitioner to the same. He has further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 15.02.2020 and no custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. So far as the petitioners in B. A. No. 2806 of 2020 are concerned, learned counsel submits that the petitioners have been implicated for being the brothers of Manoj Kumar. In course of investigation, none of the witnesses have taken the name of these petitioners. It has been stated that both the petitioners are in custody since 28.02.2020. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also referred to a judgment in the case of "Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation" reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40. Mr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers has been given in the invoices submitted by Sri Manoj Kumar which is apparently false as there is no firm in existence in the name of M/s. Star Traders at Surat. In fact the son of Raj Kumar Patodia had denied being aware of any purchase of diamond or of the residential address of his father which had been provided by the petitioner - Manoj Kumar. In fact, with respect to the agricultural income for which reliance has been placed on various documents by the learned counsel for the petitioner, but in course of investigation, the statements of several persons who were said to have purchased the agricultural produce have stated otherwise which also contradicts the claim of the petitioner - Manoj Kumar Singh regarding his explanation with respect to the income from agricultural produce. So far as the petitioner in B. A. No. 2806 of 2020 is concerned, they appear to have been implicated being the brothers of the main accused - Sri Manoj Kumar. At this juncture, it would be relevant to refer to some of the pronouncements which have been relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners. In the case of "Shri P. Chidambaram Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation" (supra), it has bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty. 22. From the earliest times, it was appreciated that detention in custody pending completion of trial could be a cause of great hardship. From time to time, necessity demands that some unconvicted persons should be held in custody pending trial to secure their attendance at the trial but in such cases, "necessity" is the operative test. In this country, it would be quite contrary to the concept of personal liberty enshrined in the Constitution that any person should be punished in respect of any matter, upon which, he has not been convicted or that in any circumstances, he should be deprived of his liberty upon only the belief that he will tamper with the witnesses if left at liberty, save in the most extraordinary circumstances. 23. Apart from the question of prevention being the object of refusal of bail, one must not lose sight of the fact that any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case of money laundering. All the petitioners are in custody since 28.02.2020 and at the present juncture, no custodial interrogation is necessary. It further appears that the precursor to the investigation carried out by the Directorate of Enforcement appears to be the case instituted by the Vigilance Bureau in which the said Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Kumar Singh has been granted bail in B. A. No. 4392 of 2010. Judgments referred to above have categorically underlined the principle that the ultimate consideration in a case of bail will have to be a case to case basis on the facts involved therein and securing the presence of the accused to stand trial. An economic offence is a grave offence and considering the role played by the petitioner in B. A. No. 2134 of 2020 in which he had misused his position of being the Private Secretary of the then Speaker as well as the then Minister while amassing a huge wealth which is disproportionate to his known source of income and having miserably failed to submit any appropriate explanation for such income from the proceeds of crime, I am not inclined to grant bail to him. The prayer for bail of the petitioner in B. A. No. 2134 of 2020 is her ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
