9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 1436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of money laundering damages the economic and financial system of the country and it can put the economy on hold or can derail it. It is more serious than the murder. The money laundering is not only used for the drug trading but also for terrorist activities and such crime affect the integrity and sovereignty of the country. It reveals that the bank accounts in the name of the complainant and others were misused in connivance with the bank officials of G.B. Road, Gaya inasmuch as huge amount of cash was deposited and transferred to different other accounts without knowledge and consent of the account holders and thereby making such deposits/transfers illegal and unlawful in violation of the rule, regulation and law as well as Section 4 of Money Laundering Act. Money is being siphoned off immediately from the account to conceal its origin and to project it as untainted against this petitioner- accused along with others. The petitioner cannot be enlarged on anticipatory bail - application dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Shiva Textile and (d) Mr. Vimal Kumar. After deposit of cash amount in the above accounts in following way money was transferred through bank transfer to the petitioner's firm bank account with the ICICI Bank, Burra Bazar in the name of M/s Shivam Agency. 23.09.2016 - By RTGS Rs.75 lakhs (Rs.60 lakhs + Rs.15 lakhs) from Bhola Textile 26.09.2016 - By RTGS Rs.10 lakhs from Vimal Kumar 03.10.2016 - By RTGS Rs.36 lakhs from Shiva Textile 10.11.2016 - By RTGS Rs.60 lakhs from Ruby Kumari (After demonetization) total Rs.1.81 crores (rupees one crore eighty one lakhs) only 5. Further allegation is that as per statement of this petitioner under Section 50 of the PMLA Act, he did not personally know the above four persons and that he received supply of sugar orer from Shri Chakresh Jain, Son of Pawan Kumar Jain, however, Chakresh Jain denies any knowledge of such transfer, but as per Call Detail Record (CDR) analysis Chakresh Jain was in constant tough with others including this petitioner during the relevant period and that there is deep nexus amongst them for money laundering. It is also alleged that the petitioner raised sales invoice prior to receipt of goods which were c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of demonetization when the account of Ruby Kumari was searched by the E.D. and when her statement was taken, she refused to identify the petitioner and infact even the petitioner does not know her as Chakresh Jain was the mediator between them and petitioner received the amount on the instructions of Chakresh Jain. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that when the petitioner came to know about the whole facts he contacted Chakresh Jain who told him if E.D. called him for the statement, he will certainly give the true statement but when he was called by the E.D. for the statement, it was shocking that he (Chakresh Jain) flatly refused to recognize Ruby Kumari in order to save himself then the petitioner instituted and registered F.I.R. against them being Civil Lines P.S. Case No.69/2018 on 13.02.2018 for the offence under Sections 419, 420, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code enclosing all the documents, like, licence, Bilty, Challan etc. It is further submitted that the amount of Rs.60 lacs were transferred to the account of the petitioner for sugar price during demonetization from the account of Ruby Kumari by Moti Lal Patwa on the instructions of Chakresh Jain. Lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 2021: Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another]. He further relies upon the original order dated 07.10.2021, which was modified with respect to Section 45 of the PMLA by an order dated 16.12.2021 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and reading the same together the Hon'ble Supreme Court broadly held that PMLA Offence is under Category C as per the order dated 07.10.2021. 9. The requisite condition is that the accused is not arrested during investigation and that he has cooperated through in the investigation including appearing before the investigating officer whenever called which the petitioner in the present case is compliant. 10. Dr. K.N. Singh, the learned Additional Solicitor General assisted by Mr. Anshay Bahadur Mathur appearing on behalf of Enforcement Directorate has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner-accused by referring the complaint petition and thereby argued that during investigation under PMLA, it is established that the petitioner-accused Shyam Sunder Bajaj, proprietor of M/s Shivam Agency, is knowingly involved in acquisition, concealment and transfer of proceeds of crime and projection of the same as unta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 181 lakhs to the bank account number 627905500301 held with ICICI Bank, Burra Bazar, Kolkata in the name of M/s Shivam Agency from the bank accounts of Smt. Rubi Kumari, Shri Vimal Kumar, M/s Bhola Textile and M/s Shiva Textiles and not taken delivery of sugar in lieu of this amount. It is further submitted that the petitioner has raised sales invoice no.1058 to 1062, in the name of Rubi Kumari on 11.11.2016, from the stock of sugar purchased vide invoice no.2603 to 2606 all dated 16.11.2016 and 2670 dated 21.11.2016 issued by K.M. Sugar Mills Limited, Motinagar, Faizabad (prior to receipt of goods, which were claimed to have been sold). 11. Hence, it is logical to conclude that M/s Shivam Agency, Kolkata (petitioner's firm) is not involved in any genuine business transaction in respect of Rs.1.81 Crores received in its bank account mentioned above. Regarding receipt of the said amount, the petitioner (Shri Shyam Sunder Bajaj) had no credible/verifiable explanation. Therefore, proceeds of crime amounting to Rs.1,08,89,928/- available with Shyam Sunder Bajaj has been attached vide PAO No.02/2018 dated 01.02.2018 and O.C. No.894/2018 has been filed for adjudication which has bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o police officer shall investigate into an offence under this Act unless specifically authorised, by the Central Government by a general or special order, and, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed.] (2) The limitation on granting of bail specified in sub-section (1) is in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail." 14. Dr. Singh relies on the judgment passed in the case of Ajay Kumar Vs. Directorate of Enforcement in Crl. Appl. (BA). 1149 of 2021 the Bombay High Court (D.B.) on reference vide order dated 06/28.01.2022 while relying on V.C. Mohan case [Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).8441/2021] decided on 04.01.2022 observed that with the amendment in the Act post Nikesh Tarachand Shah the entire situation is changed, taking note of Nikesh Sah case observed that twin conditions of Section 45 of the Act stand revived. 15. Learned counsel for the E.D. further submits that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, (2019) 9 SCC 24 held that economic offence stand as a different class as they affect economic fabri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
