9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de by the learned Special Public Prosecutor, petitioner had not disclosed the two facts pertaining to the end-use of mis-appropriated amount, which is the proceeds of the crime, and as of now Rs.7 crores were recovered and nearly about Rs.35 crores is yet to be recovered by the investigating agency and crores of rupees of Port trust which is a public money, were mis-appropriated by the petitioner /A22 along with other accused persons. Therefore, the authority relied on by the petitioner's counsel to show that the role of the petitioner is restricted only in respect of creation of the alleged fabricated fake FD receipts, as such is unsustainable one. Considering antecedence of the petitioner that he had already involved in Bank fraud case during the year 2009 in FIR.No.RC.14/E/2009- CBI-EOW/Chennai dated 04.09.2009, which was registered by the CBI, EOW, Chennai. In that case, Rs.25 Crores belonging to M/s.Northern Coal fields Limited (M/s.NCL), were fraudulently transfered by one Krishnan Rao to the Current Account No.3014563150 of his Company and subsequently, they transfered the amounts to several Accounts. In that case, the petitioner also opened an Account in ICICI Bank, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in connection with Spl.C.C.No.02 of 2022 on the file of the learned IX Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai arising out of the registration of Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) No.CEZO-I/40/2020/Chennai-I, seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/A22 had helped Sudalaimuthu/A1, in creating fake Fixed Deposit receipts, which were created on the basis of the original FD receipts, which were obtained by A25/ Gurunathan and through one T.Esakki, the same have been handed over to Chennai Port Trust, with active connivance of Raghu Bernard/ A30. It is further alleged that A22/Suresh Kumar, the petitioner herein under active connivance with, A1/Sudalaimuthu, forged and fabricated Chennai Port Trust profile, Board resolutions, Authorization letters, bearing specimen signatures, and Rubber Stamps of Chennai Port Trust Officials, Employee ID cards, etc., for the purpose of opening fake Current Account in the name of Chennai Port Trust General Insurance Fund with Indian Bank, Koyembedu Branch, by way of impersonation by A4/Ganesh Natarajan and thereby, facilitated the Port Trust Fund into different acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... officials in the Board Resolution and authorization letter and also fabricated official letter format of Chennai Port Trust by using the name as Port of Chennai and its logo, and thus the petitioner had directed his known person Shri Shafiq Ahamed to prepare the fake documents in the aspect of Board Resolution, Authorization letter, Employee ID card, fixed deposit receipts. These documents were used for the purpose of creating fake account bearing No.6867825525 in the name of Chennai Port Trust, by impersonating of A4/ Shri Ganesh Natarajan as official of Chennai Port Trust and the fake FD receipts were delivered to Chennai Port Trust against the investment made by them. Furthermore, as per the statement given by A1/Sudalaimuthu, recorded under Section 15 of the Prevention of Money laundering Act, in the Central prison, Puzhal, in which inter-alia, he stated that as per the petitioner's instruction only, he downloaded the documents from the Port whatsapp and after downloading he handed over all the documents to the petitioner. Further, he also stated that, he downloaded the KYC document of Chennai Port Trust and handed over the same to the petitioner near Porur, for handling ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in case No.ECIR/07/CZO/PMLA/2009 against Sh.T.V.Krishna others. It was alleged that an amount of Rs.25 Crores belonging to M/s.Northern Coalfields Limited (M/s.NCL) was fraudulently transferred by Sh.T.V.Krishna Rao to the Current Account No.3014563150 of his Company M/s.Krishna Builders, Chennai and subsequently the same has been transferred/withdrawn deposited within 6 days i.e. between 24.07.2009 and 29.07.2009 from the Bank Account of M/s.Krishna Builders to the accounts of several persons / companies for the purpose of projecting the ill-gotten money as legally earned money. Further, the learned Special Public Prosecutor submitted that during the PMLA investigation in the above case, it was revealed that the petitioner herein was actively involved in the offence of money laundering. It was revealed that as per instructions from Sh.T.V.K.Krishna Rao, during the last of week of July, 2009, Sh.T.Arun along with Sh.G.Padmanabhan, Sh.Suresh Kumar/petitioner and his friend Sh.Rajesh Sai Ram approached ICICI bank and opened Savings Bank Account in the name of Sh.G.Padmanabhan. In the above said case in C.C.No.4 of 2014, this petitioner is arr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e scheduled offence; iii. proceeds of crime should have been projected as untainted property. The above view stands fortified by the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nikesh Tarachand Shah vs. Union of India and Another [(2018) 11 SCC 1]: 11. Having heard the learned counsel for both sides, it is important to first understand what constitutes the offence of money laundering. Under Section 3 of the Act, the kind of persons responsible for money laundering is extremely wide. Words such as whosoever , directly or indirectly and attempts to indulge would show that all persons who are even remotely involved in this offence are sought to be roped in. An important ingredient of the offence is that these persons must be knowingly or actually involved in any process or activity connected with proceeds of crime and proceeds of crime is defined under the Act, by Section 2(1) (u) thereof, to mean any property derived or obtained directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence (which is referred to in our judgment as the predicate offence). Thus, whosoever is involved as aforesaid, in a proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e friends with one Mr.Raghu Bernard who used to work in Finance Department of Chennai Port Trust. I met Mr. Raghu Bernand through Suresh Kumar for the first time in 2017-18 at Tuticorin. Answer 5:...... Mr.Sudalaimuthu with the help of one Suresh Kumar (not the one mentioned above in question no.3) used to prepare fake deposit receipts with the same receipt number. ...... Answer 6: Mr.Suresh Kumar (tall, thin,black, blad), who is in the business of chilli, cashews, water cans etc.,made those fake seals, bonds, Fixed Deposits etc., and gave it to Mr.Sudalaimuthu. 11. The statement of S.Kumaran, dated 05.01.2022 recorded by the investigatin1 agency under Section 50 of PMLA in the office of Directorate of Enforecement, Chennai-I, Zonal Office, Chennai, also speaks about the involvement of the petitioner herein, which reads as follows: Answer 3: ..... During 2019-2020, Shri. Vaidhyanathan requested me to arrange some loan to his friend Shri. Sureshkumar by pledging the document, subsequently, Shri. Deivasittharasan @ Chitrarasu introduced Shri. Sureshkumar at Adyar Ananda Bhavan Hotel, Chromepet. I tried to arrange loan for Shri.Sureshkumar but the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al of the materials relied on by the respondent / Police, prima facie established that he was actually involved in the process connected with the crime, and he not only created fake FD receipts, but also intentionally assisted A1 and other accused persons to open the fake Current Account by preparing fake documents,forging the specimen signatures of the officials and Rubber Stamp of Port Trust and Port of Chennai's logo and also possession and enjoyment of the proceeds of the Crime by concealing its original documents and transferring the amounts to other accounts projecting and claiming the same as untainted. 13. Furthermore, as per the submission made by the learned Special Public Prosecutor, petitioner had not disclosed the two facts pertaining to the end-use of mis-appropriated amount, which is the proceeds of the crime, and as of now Rs.7 crores were recovered and nearly about Rs.35 crores is yet to be recovered by the investigating agency and crores of rupees of Port trust which is a public money, were mis-appropriated by the petitioner /A22 along with other accused persons. Therefore, the authority relied on by the petitioner's counsel to show that the role of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the amount is handed over. Such intent having been entertained well before the amount is actually handed over, the person concerned would certainly be involved in the process or activity connected with proceeds of Crime including inter alia, the aspects of possession or acquisition thereof. By handing over money with the intent of giving bribe, such person will be assisting or will knowingly be a party to an activity connected with the proceeds of crime. Without such active participation on part of the person concerned, the money would not assume the character of being proceeds of crime. The relevant expressions from Section 3 of the PML Act are thus wide enough to cover the role played by such person. 14. The complaint filed under Sections 44 45 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 for Commission of Offence of Money Laundering as defined under Section 3 read with Section 70 and punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The Special Public Prosecutor said that, in the instant case, as discussed above, the proceedings of the Directorate of Enforcement had clearly reflected that the respondent / Police have collected sufficient materi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
