9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 284X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of any of the conditions or there is any material placed before the Court at the time of hearing of previous applications for permission for a short period. Not only that, no any order, whereby the private respondent was permitted to travel abroad, has been challenged by the applicant. The private respondent is granted permission to visit for limited period of 3 months at a time, to provide complete itinerary and contact details both to the Court and the investigating officer, to file undertaking to remain present at the time of conducting trial and not to leave India when crucial witnesses are going to be examined by the Court and further not to stay continuously for more than three months in foreign country at a time and more particularly to move out of India for the purpose of business activities only, are sufficient safeguards provided in the impugned order. On combined reading of the conditions imposed upon the private respondent, it transpires that the Designated Court took all care and caution to secure the presence of the private respondent at the time of trial, to trace the accused as and when he goes out of India as he is required to provide complete itinerary and c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 014. Since then, the passport of the private respondent was lying in the custody of Designated Court pending trial of offence under the provisions of the PMLA, but pursuant to impugned order, the passport is released in favour of the private respondent. Thus, now, passport is in possession of the private respondent as stated at bar. 5. Just to complete the remaining events that took place during interregnum period till the date of impugned order, it appears that the discharge order passed in Criminal Revision Application No.264 of 2017 in connection with the FIR being I C.R. No.16 of 2014 registered with DCB Police Station, Surat came to be quashed and set aside by the Hon ble Apex Court vide order dated 5.2.2019 in SLP (Criminal) No.6068 of 2017. Prior to it, the private respondent was released on bail vide order dated 23.2.2018 passed in SLP (Criminal) No.9528 of 2015 by the Hon ble Apex Court. Accordingly, the private respondent and other accused were released on regular bail subject to terms and conditions that came to be imposed by the learned trial Court. Vide order dated 26.2.2018, learned Designated Court released the private respondent on bail imposing various conditi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nces in connection with the offences of the PMLA. Upon scrutiny of the two FIRs, case was registered by the Director of Enforcement for investigation into the offences under the PMLA. 10. As on today, prosecution proceedings against the private respondent and other 78 accused persons have been initiated and are on the file before the Designated Special Court at Ahmedabad and the same is at the stage of framing of charge. 11. It is the case of the applicant that the private respondent and other accused persons are involved in serious offences punishable under the PMLA and huge money is remitted abroad through fake/forged bill of entries and therefore, charges against the private respondent is grave and serious in nature. It is submitted that execution of Letter Rogatory (LR) is yet to be completed and further investigation is in progress and therefore, presence of the private respondent is necessary before the Directorate of Enforcement. According to learned advocate for the applicant, hawala transactions involved in the instance case are suspected to be spread across many countries and therefore, it is clear that if the private respondent is allowed to travel out of India, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on coming to know, he returned to India and reported to the Court and thus, the private respondent has shown highest respect to the orders of the Hon'ble Court. Learned advocate for the private respondent would further submit that he was not required to apply to suspend the condition of regular bail during the period, the private respondent was discharged from the scheduled offences by the High Court, however, the private respondent applied for permission 5 times by filing various applications in the year 2019 and 2020 and only after due permission, he undertook foreign visit. On these broad premises, it is urged by Learned advocate for the private respondent that there is no impropriety or illegality in the impugned order since right to travel being fundamental right of the private respondent. Lastly, it is submitted that the private respondent is a businessman and is pursuing and expanding his business of ferrous and non-ferrous scrap material and at a time, he is required to make research of foreign supply, quality, quantity, material, transport payment etc. and thus, considering overall safeguards considered by the Designated Court to ensure smooth trial and unhamper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t say 3 years. There is no disagreement on this fact situation. Secondly, though 7 to 8 years have passed, there is no any possibility of completion of investigation even in near future or say at least for 3 to 5 years. These facts are not in dispute since the prosecution agency was not in a position to state at bar as to what further period would require to complete the remaining investigation in the offences alleged against private respondent and other co-accused persons. 17. Since the private respondent, when permitted to travel abroad during the year 2018 to 2020, observed all the conditions in its letter and spirit and there is no grievance ventilated at bar that he committed breach of any of the conditions or there is any material placed before the Court at the time of hearing of previous applications for permission for a short period. Not only that, no any order, whereby the private respondent was permitted to travel abroad, has been challenged by the applicant. 18. Having regard to the nature of business activities carried out by the private respondent, it cannot be disputed that he is not required to take prompt decision to take advantage of business opportunity and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any condition is breached or any attempt is made to influence/temper with the evidence. On each occasion, the private respondent returned back in time and surrender the passport and therefore now onwards, if passport is retained subject to rigorous conditions as invoked by the Designated Court, no any prejudice is likely to cause the prosecution agency in view of the fact that there is no near end either to the investigation or trial and more particularly, there is no likelihood of commencement or completion of trial in near future. 21. On combined reading of the conditions imposed upon the private respondent, it transpires that the Designated Court took all care and caution to secure the presence of the private respondent at the time of trial, to trace the accused as and when he goes out of India as he is required to provide complete itinerary and contact details in advance and not to stay continuously for more than three months in foreign countries. Thus, there is complete check on the movement of the private respondent to the knowledge of the concerned investigating agency and the Court and therefore, to impose condition to seek leave of the Court is futile exercise on the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
