TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 489X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ord. 3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are falsely implicated in the subject case. They have nothing to do with the alleged offences, which are false and baseless. The petitioners hail from respectable families having deep roots in the society. They never indulged in any crime including the subject crime. It is submitted that present investigation is initiated by the Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad, vide File No.ECIR/HYZO/07/2018, on suspected commission of offence/s under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short "PML Act"). The lenders of M/s.VMC Systems Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'Company') have unilaterally declared the account of the Company as 'Fraud', without even providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and without providing 'forensic audit report', which formed the basis for the said declaration. The action of declaring the account of the Company as 'fraud', is sub judice before this Court in W.P.No.18649 of 2020, wherein, this Court was pleased to restrain all the lenders of the Company from taking any coercive action against the petitioners. Registering the subject crime a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry. Further, anticipatory bail should not be granted during investigation, especially when the offence/s are under special enactments like the PML Act, wherein, arrest can take place under Section 19 of the said Act after formation of a reason to believe on the basis of material in his possession, that a person has committed the offence of money laundering. Further, the High Court of Delhi, in Vakamulla Chandrasekhar Vs. Enforcement Directorate and others Decided on 08.05.2017 in W.P.(Crl.) No.852 of 2017 held that "it, prima facie appears to us that under the Scheme of PMLA, the relief of statutory anticipatory bail is excluded." Earlier bail petitions of the petitioners were dismissed by the Court below, vide common order, dated 26.07.2021, passed in Crl.M.P.Nos.1958 and 1980 of 2021. No valid grounds are made out by the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail and ultimately prayed to dismiss both the Criminal Petitions. 5. In view of the submissions made by both sides, the point that arises for determination in both these Criminal Petitions is: "Whether the petitioners in both these Criminal Petitions are entitled for benefit of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C?" POINT: 6. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te in the field of Telecommunications. The petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5977 of 2021, being the promoter Director of the Company and also Director in M/s.Ennar Energy Limited, has not made statutory filing with Registrar of Companies, and other statutory authorities for the Company, in order to hide the crucial information pertaining to the operations of the Company. In addition, he acquired 24,97,087 equity shares valued at Rs. 2.49 crores of the Company in the year 2010, but the share subscription amount is not traceable in the bank accounts of the Company. That apart, he, along with the Managing Director of the Company, persuaded M/s.FIL Capital Management (Mauritius) Limited, and M/s.Multi-consultant Trustees Limited, Mauritius, to make 100 crore investment in the Company in the year 2010 and on the strength of the said investment, got additional loan sanctioned from various banks. Further, he actively engaged in transfer of proceeds of crimes to overseas related entities and transferred 280 crores to M/s.Cemetric Inc., USA, and M/s.Prithvi INC.LLC, USA, related to his daughter/Vuppalapati Madhavi, under the guise of fake import of software/consultancy services. Thus, he, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of huge number of witnesses is required to be recorded. Under Section 19 of the PML Act, after formation of a reason to believe on the basis of material in his possession, that a person has committed the offence of money laundering, be arrested. In Vakamulla Chandrasekhar's case (supra) relied upon by the learned Special Public Prosecutor, the High Court of Delhi held that "it, prima facie appears to us that under the Scheme of PMLA, the relief of statutory anticipatory bail is excluded." Further, in view of huge magnitude of conspiracy angle and possible involvement of the petitioners herein and pending their interrogation, granting any sort of relief, including anticipatory bail, to the petitioners would disable the respondent/ prosecution from further proceeding to trace the proceeds of crime and attaching it provisionally under Section 5(1) of PML Act, which is the basic objective of the said Act. In view of the serious allegations as indicated above, thorough investigation and interrogation is warranted. It is also pertinent to state that in the event of grant of bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C, it may not be possible for the respondent/prosecution to trace the proceeds of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|