9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctorate in compliance of order of this Court, filed an affidavit dated 15.03.2024 mentioning inter-alia that the role of Mr. Dhirendra Pal Solanki is also being investigated and efforts are being made to finalize the investigation with regard to transfer of proceeds of crime generated in this case by various entities. So far as the twin conditions as provided in Section 45 of the PML Act, 2002 is concerned, it is well settled that Court is not required to record a positive finding that accused has not committed an offence under the PML Act, 2002 and while releasing him on bail he will not commit an offence. The Court has to maintain a balance between the subsequent judgement of conviction or acquittal and is required to record reasonable reasons of satisfaction on the basis of facts and circumstances of the each case with broad probabilities as to whether there is possibility of the accused committing a crime after grant of bail - There is no positive evidence of cash transaction also between the applicant and Mr. Dhidrena Pal Solanki except statement of Mr. Dhidrena Pal Solanki and presumption against the applicant, hence this Court is prima-facie satisfied that twin conditions pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vestor would get Rs. 9765/- per month up to 12 months. It was also assured that if anyone invests in three, five or seven bikes, would get bonus of Rs. 4590/-, Rs. 9180/- and Rs. 13,770/- respectively and after expiry of twelve month the bike would become the property of GIPL company. The agreements with investors in this regard were executed by Mr. Sanjay Bhati (Managing Director of GIPL Company). On the assurance of GIPL company, its promoters and other associates, people invested their money in the said BIKEBOT scheme but the company stopped giving the monthly returns since December, 2018. On demanding monthly returns by the investors, the persons of GIPL Company started threatening them of dire consequences and refused to refund money invested by investors in BIKEBOT scheme. On mounting pressure by the investors, GIPL issued post dated cheques drawn on Noble Co-operative Bank to the investors but said cheques were returned unpaid on account of insufficient fund in the account of GIPL company. In the aforesaid background of the fact, initially 25 FIRs (now number of FIRs increased to 55) were registered on various dates between 12.02.2019 and 25.04.2019 on the basis of complaint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h (applicant), Smt. Meena Anand and Narendra Singh Sisodia. 3.3-The instant case is related to third supplementary complaint dated 18.09.2023, in which, case of the Enforcement Directorate against the present applicant-Dinesh Kumar Singh @ Dinesh Gujjar is that investors fund collected through BIKEBOT scam in the accounts of GIPL was transferred to several persons and entities. One such person being Mr. Dhirendra Pal Solanki, who has received amount of Rs. 17.94 crores from GIPL, out of which, Rs. 1.7 crores were transferred by Mr. Dhirendra Pal Solanki from his account no. 0267002100045212 of DSM Infracon Company in the bank account No.31232418582 maintained with SBI, Grater Noida Branch of the applicant Dinesh Kumar Singh @ Dinesh Gujjar and has also given Rs. 5.23 crores in cash to the applicant on the exchange of promise of the applicant that some ED officials are in his touch, therefore, ongoing investigation against Dhirendra Pal Solanki shall be closed and his properties will be released. 4-Submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are as under : (4.1) The applicant has no concern with BIKEBOT scheme floated by M/s Garvit Innovative Promoters Ltd. The applicant was ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso pointed out that at the time of giving loan by the applicant to Mr. Dhirendra Pal Solanki, the BIKEBOT scheme was not in existence. (4.8) So far as receiving an amount of Rs. 1.76 crores by the applicant Dinesh Kumar Singh @ Dinesh Gujjar from Mr. Dhirendra Pal Solanki is concerned, it is submitted that Dhirendra Pal Solanki in his statement has also admitted that in the year 2010-12, he had borrowed Rs. 1.95 crores from the applicant. Details of the same has also been mentioned in Table no.14 of para 7.10.4(b) of supplementary complaint dated 18.09.2023 and said loan amount was returned by Dhirendra Pal Solanki to the applicant by paying Rs. 1.76 crores between 23.11.2020 and 29.10.2021 from his account no. 0267002100045212 of M/s DSM Infracon Pvt. Ltd. to the account no. 31232418582 of the applicant. In this regard, it is also pointed out that Dhirendra Pal Solanki, who is Director of M/s DSM Infracon Pvt. Ltd., in the documents (confirmation of his account) filed along with his ITR has acknowledged that on 01.04.2017, total Rs. 1,78,75,000/- of the applicant was due on him. Similarly Madhu Solanki w/o Dhirendra Pal Solanki in the document (confirmation of her account) filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion in the account of the applicant to establish that this is the money which was given by Dhirendra Pal Solanki, therefore ED has come up with a stand that since the applicant and his Chartered Accountant did not explain the cash transactions properly, hence, it shall be presumed that the said amount was given by Dhirendra Pal Solanki to the applicant. (4.13) Learned counsel for the parties also pointed out that several persons/ co-accused have been granted bail. Details of the same are given as under:- (a) Manoj Kumar Tyagi, who is accused in the prosecution complaint dated 17.02.2021, has been granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.04.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6190 of 2022. (b) Virendra Singh, who is accused in the first supplementary complaint dated 13 01 2022, has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 20.05.2023 of the trial court. (c) Meena Anand, who is co-accused with the applicant in third supplementary complaint dated 18.09.2023, has been granted bail vide order dated 18.01.2024 of the trial court. (d) Mohd. Wasiq Azad and Mohd. Shariq Azad, who are co-accused with the applicant, have been granted anticipatory ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against him showing him fear that upon failure to do so, Enforcement Directorate shall arrest him and his family members on his instructions. Regarding the plea of loan as submitted on behalf of the applicant, learned counsel for the ED referring the statement of Mr. Dhirendra Pal Solanki submitted that the cash amount Rs. 4,95,00,000/- received by Mr. Dhirendra Pal Solanki upon the sale of immovable properties was given to repay loan amounts to Dinesh Singh Gujjar on 28.9.2012 and 31.5.2014 and after repayment, all his debts which he borrowd to Dinesh Singh Gujjar got cleared. Lastly, it is submitted that the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 6-Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that it is not in dispute that applicant has no role in fraud, etc. committed by M/s Garvit Innovative Promoters Ltd. through BIKEBOT scheme. The applicant is neither named in 55 FIRs lodged by the investors nor charge-sheeted in those cases. After registration of ECIR by the Enforcement Directorate, the complicity of Mr. Dhirendra Pal Solanki had come at initial stage of investigation in the statement dated 22.11.2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ipatory bail as noted above and the said bail orders or anticipatory bail orders have not been challenged by the Enforcement Directorate. 8-So far as the twin conditions as provided in Section 45 of the PML Act, 2002 is concerned, it is well settled that Court is not required to record a positive finding that accused has not committed an offence under the PML Act, 2002 and while releasing him on bail he will not commit an offence. The Court has to maintain a balance between the subsequent judgement of conviction or acquittal and is required to record reasonable reasons of satisfaction on the basis of facts and circumstances of the each case with broad probabilities as to whether there is possibility of the accused committing a crime after grant of bail. In this regard, it is relevant to mention that it is not in dispute that proceeds of crime amounting Rs. 179,450,000/- has been transferred from M/s. Garvit Innovative Promoter Limited (G.I.P.L.) to four bank account of the Dhirendra Pal Solanki, namely HDFC Bank bearing A/c No. 7381930002208, Axis Bank bearing A/c No. 910010041729721, ICICI Bank bearing A/c No. 97301504222 and PNB Bank bearing A/c no. 0069003171160, but no amount o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
