9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... collected the source of information and the report was also received from the office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and collected all information and issued summons invoking Section 50 of the PMLA Act and a case was registered in ECIR/BGZO/09/2020. The allegation that this petitioner did not co-operate and the allegation is that the Crores of rupees more than 1000 Crores was misappropriated and the said amount was depositors money. Without obtaining the mandate from the depositors created advances and allowed to withdraw over and above the actual deposits and also an allegation is that the loans were sanctioned by just obtained partial coverage of mortgages and the Bank did not create charge in respect of the said properties in favour of whom, the loans were advanced. This petitioner is in custody. No doubt, the provisional order has been passed and the same has been confirmed and also questioned, which is pending. Having taken note of the allegations made in the complaint and also analysis of Bank Statement held by this petitioner and his family members and the fact is that he is the Chairman and earlier he was the Vice-President, is not in dispute and collected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act. A case was registered against seven accused persons in connection with misappropriation of funds and fraud committed in connection with the affairs of Sri Guru Raghavendra Sahakara Bank, Netkallappa Circle, Bengaluru. The said FIR is transferred to Basavanagudi Police Station on the point of jurisdiction. One more case has been registered in Crime No.37/2020 for the same offences. Thereafter, the investigation of the case was transferred to the CID and the Investigating Officer gave requisition to delete the offence under Section 9 of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act and after the investigation the said case is numbered as C.C.No.28892/2021. 4. In the meanwhile, the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Bengaluru Zonal Office has collected the source of information receiving the letter from the office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. First information in respect of Crime No.69/2020 and in respect of Crime No.37/2020, invoked the scheduled offences under Section 2(1)(x) (y) of the PMLA Act and found that there is a prima facie ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns regarding continuous ever-greening of the loan accounts and siphoned the amounts with the knowledge. Hence, the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Bengaluru, issued summons under Section 50(2) of the Act, calling upon the petitioner to appear before him. But he did not co-operate with it and when he was appeared on 14.02.2022, he was taken into the custody and the petitioner failed to share information about the actual beneficiaries who are in possession of proceeds of the crime. The petitioner was remanded to judicial custody and extended from time to time. An approach was made to the Sessions Court invoking Section 439 of Cr.P.C., and the same was dismissed. Hence, the present petition is filed before this Court. 6. The main contention of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner before this Court is that he is an innocent and the entire materials collected by the Police are not sufficient to hold that the petitioner has committed the offences in question. It is also contended that after initiation of the proceedings by the Enforcement Directorate, properties belonging to the petitioner and his family members were subjected to Provisional Attachment vide or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner would vehemently contend that till February he was not taken into custody and the statements should be corroborated in trial. The Aujudicating Authority order is also questioned and the appeal is pending. The learned senior counsel also would vehemently contend that the maximum punishment is only seven years and the properties already attached. It takes time to decide with regard to the misappropriation and substantial investigation has already been done and he has been arrested before filing of the complaint. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 10. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner in support of his arguments he relied upon the order passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.1189/2022 dated 30.03.2022 and referring to this order would vehemently contend that this Court in detail discussed the relevant provisions of the PMLA Act viz., Sections 19, 45 and 50 of the PMLA Act. Having considered the matter in depth, the Special Court has to charge the accused for the offences under Section 3 of the PMLA Act after taking cognizance of the said offences. When once complaint/final report under Section 45 of the PMLA Act is filed with the opinion of the investigating agency f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing is accepted and no explanation. The deposit amount was used for the family benefits and committed fraud and acquired huge properties in the name of the family by using the depositors money. Hence, the learned counsel for the respondent would vehemently contend that it is not a case for exercising the discretion in favour of the petitioner. 13. The learned counsel for the respondent in support of his arguments he relied upon the judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Sekar v. Union of India and others reported in 2018 SCC OnLine Del 6523 , and referring to this judgment, the learned counsel brought to the notice of this Court that the Delhi High Court has taken note of the background to the PMLA and the Key provisions of the PMLA and the Judicial Review of the Provisional Attachment Order and taken note of Section 5 and contend that the reasons to believe should constitute reasons has to be recorded that means sufficient cause to believe that thing but not otherwise. The reasons to believe has to meet the safeguards in between the second proviso to Section 5(1) of PMLA Act read with Section 5(1) of PMLA that means to satisfy the requirement of law. In the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ked and one more case was registered in Crime No.37/2020, wherein, an offence under Section 9 of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act was invoked. The matter was also earlier referred to CID and got it deleted Section 9 of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishments Act and also a case has been registered and numbered as C.C.No.28892/2021 which is pending before the Court. 17. It is also important to note that the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Bengaluru Zonal Office has collected the source of information and the report was also received from the office of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and collected all information and issued summons invoking Section 50 of the PMLA Act and a case was registered in ECIR/BGZO/09/2020. The allegation that this petitioner did not co-operate and the allegation is that the Crores of rupees more than 1000 Crores was misappropriated and the said amount was depositors money. Without obtaining the mandate from the depositors created advances and allowed to withdraw over and above the actual deposits and also an allegation is that the loans were s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Himself along with his son and his wife together have purchased 110 acres of agriculture land at Huligere, Kadur Taluka, Chikkamagaluru District, but claims for the above Company. 20. Having taken note of the allegations made in the complaint and also analysis of Bank Statement held by this petitioner and his family members and the fact is that he is the Chairman and earlier he was the Vice-President, is not in dispute and collected the source of information having acquired the deposits made by this petitioner and his family members i.e., son, wife and daughter. The learned counsel also would vehemently contend that this is not a case for granting bail. The fact that the huge amount of depositors money was siphoned is prima-facie discloses when the custodial interrogation was made. Apart from that, the petitioner has to make out a case that he has not committed an offence and there must be satisfaction of reasons to believe i.e., missing. The fact that the family members are also the part of the Bank affairs is not in dispute. The properties were acquired is also not in dispute. But learned counsel would vehemently contend that the explanation was given and explanation has not b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
