9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 1680X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons 3 and 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, brief, is that initially an FIR bearing No. 05/2015 was registered by the Economic Offences Wing - Anti Corruption Bureau against the applicant for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 109, 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and the EOW-ACB charge-sheeted the applicant on 15.06.2015. Since these offences were scheduled offences, the Directorate of Enforcement registered a case under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (for short 'the PML Act') against the applicant and other accused persons, and after inquiry, submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he applicant and other co-accused persons. The applicant himself surrendered before the trial Court and he has not misused the temporary bail granted to him nor has influenced any witness. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in this case there are as many as 9 accused persons including present applicant and bail application of present applicant has only been vehemently and strongly opposed by the Prosecution, whereas formal objection was raised by the Special Public Prosecutor in respect of bail of others. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that till date there is no progress at all in the trial and the trial Court is simply adjourning the matter. Thus, it is apparent that disposal of the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceedings by the trial Court and evidence on record, submitted that the applicant is a Government Servant (Incharge Executive Engineer in Water Resources Department) and by way of corrupt means, under proceeds of crime, has earned near about Rs. 16,51,31,878/- while he was posted as In-charge Executive Engineer at Kharang Water Resources Division, Bilaspur from 04.07.2008 to 05.01.2015. According to him, the money which was earned under 'Scheduled Offence' and 'Proceeds of Crime' has been invested in his wife's and brother's business showing it to be untainted and, in a very short span time, the turnover of their business have crossed crores of rupees, which they have failed to establish. The learned counsel submitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pto him to prove the contrary. That apart, an unsecured loan of Rs. 70,00,000/- was also taken by the applicant from his relatives, but the relatives of the applicant in their statement have categorically denied giving of any such loan to the applicant. He also submits that the applicant is the man of corrupt nature and earlier also due to commission of irregularities in muster-roll, he was placed under suspension on 25.07.1996. Learned counsel has also taken this Court through the statements of co-accused persons, except his wife, brother and friends, from whom huge cash was seized and they have categorically stated that they were subordinate to the applicant, the cash belongs to the applicant and the applicant was threatening them that if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is always committed with calculated design profiting himself and his relatives regardless of the consequence to the community. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the decisions of Supreme Court in the matter of State of Gujarat Vs. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal and another reported in AIR 1987 SC 1321 and Nikesh Tarachand Shah Vs. Union of India and another reported in (2018) 11 SCC. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. It is true that at present there may or may not be direct or indirect attempts to indulge the applicant in any process of activity connected with the proceeds of crime, there is no attempt on the part of the applicant to disclose the source of the large sums of money handl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt in the matter of Rohit Tandon Vs. The Enforcement Directorate reported in 2018 (11) SCC 46 : AIR 2017 SC 5309) has held in para 18, which reads thus:- "18. The consistent view taken by this Court is that economic offences having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country. Further, when attempt is made to project the proceeds of crime as untainted money and also that the allegations may not ultimately be established, but having been made, the burden of proof that the monies were not the proceeds of crime and were not, therefore, tainte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
