9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1879X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayed vital role in laundering money. Bail cannot be granted - bail application rejected. - CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2267 OF 2018 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATON NO.1338 OF 2018 - - - Dated:- 22-12-2018 - PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. Mr.Rizwan Merchant i/b. M/s.Rizwan Merchant Associates, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs.G.P. Mulekar, APP for the Respondent State. Mr.Pranav Badheka a/w. Shubhabrata Chakraborti and Mr.Vaibhav Wali i/b. M/s. Juris Corp., Advocate for the Intervener. Ms.Nitee Punde, Spl. P.P., E.D. ORDER P.C. : This is an application for bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with ECIR No.2 of 2016. Applicant has been arrested in this case on 18th June, 2018. 2 The case of the prosecution is that MIDC Police Station has registered First Information Report No.760 of 2015 dated 18th December, 2015, invoking Section 409, 420, 477(A), 120-B read with 34 of Indian Penal Code ( IPC , for short), against applicant, Prashant Mulekar, Pankaj Shrivastav and Dinesh Jajodia. Subsequently, case was taken over by Economic Offence Wing, Mumbai (EOW) Unit V. In pursuant to the order dated 22nd December, 2015, passe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the account of M/s.YIL UAE, where the applicant was not director. It is submitted that the applicant has unnecessarily incarcerated in custody although he has been undergone detention in predicate offences. He was not party to the transaction and was unaware about all the transactions. The case of the prosecution is that the applicant is being managing director of M/s.GEL as well as incharge of the department handling products such as Mundu etc., has projected the receipt of US$ 31.79 Million into the account of M/s.GTSL from the account of M/s.YIL, to which the applicant was not party. He was not aware about the sales/collections of M/s.GTSL. Applicant has not committed any offence under the PMLA Act. He is not connected in any of the entities, who have allegedly committed the crime alleged by the prosecution. Learned Magistrate while granting bail to the applicant in the predicate offence has taken into consideration the nature of the involvement of the applicant in the crime and was pleased to grant him bail. Applicant could not be subjected to detention again in respect to the present case. The entire case relates to the documents. He was already arrested and was in custody fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seas subsidiaries or acquisition of new overseas subsidiaries and M/s.GL was not allowed to use said funds for local bill and the FCCB were also listed on Singapore Stock Exchange. The maturity date for the FCCB was January 2013, and the maturity value was approximately 165 Million US$. However, M/s.GL defaulted on maturity. Respondent has filed affidavit-in-reply opposing the application for bail. It is contended that M/s.GL has two direct overseas subsidiaries viz. M/s.Geodesic Technologies Solution Limited (M/s.GTSL), Hong Kong and M/s.Geodesic Holding Limited ( M/s. GHL ), Mauritius. M/s.GL thorough GHL, Mauritius had acquired two step-down subsidiaries viz. M/s.Zomo Technologies and M/s.Emiloto Associates based in tax haven countries and these two companies were not reputed and were merely shell companies having no established software business with consistent revenue income or prestigious client le. M/s.Geodesic Limited had made investment through these two companies. It is further submitted that the investigation under PMLA had revealed that the amount of FCCB raised by M/s.GL was received in the bank accounts of M/s.GTSL and M/s.GHL. Part of the amount received in the accou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent. It is submitted that the offence committed by the applicant accused is of high magnitude in terms of money involved in the said transaction and that the alleged crime is on the economy of the country. Foreign investors, who have invested huge amounts are now wary of investing of further amount. The applicant is involved in money laundering. The company issued a bond as accepted Trust Deed dated 17th January, 2008, in respect of bonds with Citi Bank. Under the Trust deed, the said bank was appointed as a trustee for and on behalf of the bond holders who are the actual and beneficial owners of the money due under the bonds. The investigating authority despite all efforts, has not been successful in recovering the money, due under the bonds which was siphoned off by the applicant and other accused. He, therefore, submitted that the application be rejected. The bondholders being the actual and the beneficial owners of the bounds and being the actual victim of perpetuated crime seeks intervention to oppose bail. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Bhiar Anr. Vs. Amit Kumar Alias Bachcha Rai, (2017) 13 SCC 751. He also pointed ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by M/s.GL through Mr.Prashant Mulekar. Out of 82.02 Million USD invested in EEMF, an amount of 57.52 Million USD was transferred into the accounts of M/s.YIL fro EEMF, UAE, wherein Dinesh Jajodia is a director. M/s.YIL, out of USD 57.52 Million which was transferred in the accounts of M/s.YIL. 10 It is alleged in the affidavit filed by Prashant Mulekar, Executive Director of M/s.GL dated 6th April, 2014, in this Court in Company Petition No.471 of 2014, he had claimed the investments in M/s.Emiloto Associates, M/s.Zomo Technologies and M/s.GTSL. The investigation reveals that the amount of FCCB raised by M/s.GL was received in the Bank account of M/s.GTSL and M/s.GHL. Part of the amount is received in the account of M/s.GTSL was transferred in the account of M/s.Zomo Technologies and M/s.Emiloto Associates. After receipt of the funds in those companies, the same were not utilized for the intended purpose of acquisition of companies. It is the case of the prosecution that though the amount totalling to USD 31.79 Million was transferred from the account of M/s.YIL into account of M/s.GTSL, M/s.GTSL has not disclosed the transaction with M/s.YIL in their books of accounts. M/s.GTS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
