9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence and, therefore, no case of money laundering is made out. The involvement of the petitioner as per the prosecuting agency is primarily through the angle of conspiracy though according to the Enforcement Directorate Section 120B was struck off in the formal FIR at the behest of the Police in spite of conspiracy playing a predominant role in the predicate offence which led to institution of Sadar P.S. Case No. 272 of 2023. The prelude to the entire episode culminating in submission of prosecution complaint and supplementary prosecution complaint by the Enforcement Directorate is the recovery of huge quantity of incriminating documents showing forgery, manipulation and tampering of government records and mutilation of government revenue records. Reasons to believe - HELD THAT:- The statement u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 is admissible in evidence as such statement is deemed to be recorded in a judicial proceeding as envisaged in sub-Section 4 of Section 50 PMLA, 2002. This Court is aware of the fact that meticulously delving into such evidence is the domain of the learned trial court and, therefore, only a fleeting reference has been made of the statements recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 of the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 45 PMLA, 2002 to the effect that there is reason to believe that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence as alleged - Though the conduct of the petitioner has been sought to be highlighted by the Enforcement Directorate on account of the First Information Report instituted by the petitioner against the officials of the Enforcement Directorate but on an overall conspectus of the case there is no likelihood of the petitioner committing a similar nature of offence. The twin conditions as prescribed u/s 45 PMLA, 2002 having been fulfilled, this application is allowed. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-I-cum-Special Judge, PMLA, Ranchi in connection with ECIR Case No. 06/2023, arising out of ECIR/RNZO/25/2023 dated 26.06.2023. Bail application allowed. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Miss Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv.Mr. Anurabh Chodhary, Sr. Adv. Miss Aprajita Jomowal, Adv. Mr. Abhir Datt, Adv. Mr. Piyush Chitresh, Adv. Mr. Shray Mishra, Adv For th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nous property documents along with seventeen original registers (Register-II) were seized from his possession. Since the matter was related to forgery with the revenue records by a government official the information was shared with the Chief Secretary, Jharkhand and accordingly Sadar P.S. Case No. 272/2023 was registered on a written complaint of Manoj Kumar, Circle Officer, Bargain Anchal. It has been alleged that the registers contain reference to several properties which have been acquired in an illegal manner including the reference of properties measuring 8.86 acres at Shanti Nagar, Baragain, Bariatu Road (near Lalu Khatal) illegally acquired and possessed by the petitioner. The prosecution complaint under the PMLA, 2002 further reveals that the seventeen registers seized from Bhanu Pratap Prasad were examined and explanation u/s 50 PLMA, 2002 was sought from Bhanu Pratap Prasad which further led to the identification of tampering in the said original records aimed at extending illegal benefits to other persons and during searches on 13.04.2023 in ECIR/RNZO/18/2022, handwritten diaries were also seized from the possession of other persons namely, Md. Saddam Hussain, Imtiaz Ah ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents. The accused Bhanu Pratap Prasad was directly involved in hatching conspiracies with other persons to acquire and dispose properties in illegal manner and was an accomplice to several persons including Hemant Soren which is corroborated from the seizure of an image recovered from his mobile phone which contains the details of a cluster of landed properties situated adjacently on twelve plots at Bargain Anchal, the total area of which is around 8.86 acres. The property was acquired in an illegal and unauthorized manner by the accused Hemant Soren and he had been in continuous possession of the property since 2010-11. In course of investigation, searches were conducted u/s 17 PMLA, 2002 and during search on 29.01.2024 cash amounting to Rs. 36,34,500/-, one BMW Car along with certain documents/records were seized from the premises under the use and occupation of the accused Hemant Soren. It has been alleged that in the first survey conducted on 20.04.2023 u/s 16 of the PMLA, 2002 in respect of 8.86 acres of land which was done in presence of the Circle Officer, Circle Inspector, Circle Aamin, Baijnath Munda, Shyam Lal Pahan, Bhanu Pratap Prasad and the officials of the Directorat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ued to the accused Hemant Soren an application was immediately filed by Raj Kumar Pahan, an accomplice of Hemant Soren before the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi which was registered as SAR Case No. 81/2023-24 and vide order dated 29.01.2024 the SAR Court had cancelled the jamabandis of the earlier occupants thereby enabling the accused Raj Kumar Pahan to acquire the property on paper in order to distance Hemant Soren from the illegal occupation and possession of the subject property. The entire exercise by the SAR Court proves that the accused Hemant Soren misused his position and created parallel false evidence in order to camouflage his possession on the property and to project the said property i.e. the proceeds of crime as untainted property. 4. It has been submitted by Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner of money laundering is not made out on consideration of the broad probabilities of the case. The possession of the petitioner, either actual or constructive, on the subject property is not made out. It has been submitted that forcible possession of a property is not a scheduled offence. Possession by itself is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med the claims of Baijnath Munda and Shyam Lal Pahan over the property in question as disputed and the matter appears to be civil in nature since the original owners have several descendants and settlement of such issue is beyond the purview of the PMLA, 2002. Mr. Sibal, in context of the order dated 29.01.2024, passed in SAR Case No. 81/2023- 24 has submitted that the said order has attained finality in absence of any challenge mounted to it and the frailties, if any, in the said order could surely have been considered by a higher forum prescribed under the statute and having a doubt over the said order only on account of its being passed expeditiously would not be sufficient to make it redundant. He has in support of such stand referred to the case of State of Punjab Others versus Gurdev Singh reported in (1991) 4 SCC 1, which reads thus : 8. But nonetheless the impugned dismissal order has at least a de facto operation unless and until it is declared to be void or nullity by a competent body or court. In Smith v. East Elloe Rural District Council [1956 AC 736, 769 : (1956) 1 All ER 855, 871] Lord Radcliffe observed: (All ER p. 871) An order, even if not made in good faith, is st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... already attained finality. 6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner while taking the Court through the prosecution complaint has pointedly referred to paras 10.34, 10.40 and 10.51, which once again deals extensively with the order passed in SAR Case No. 81/2023-24 u/s 71A of the CNT Act and the unprecedented haste with which the said case was dealt with in order to shield the petitioner with a conclusion that Raj Kumar Pahan and his family members did not have possession over the 8.86 acres of land and this finding has been countered to the effect that the authority under the PMLA, 2002 is not an adjudicating authority and, therefore, precluded from deciding these issues. 7. Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned Senior Counsel has also drawn the attention of the Court to para 10.51 of the prosecution complaint while questioning the finding that 8.86 acres of land is a proceeds of crime which has been acquired deceitfully by the petitioner and his family members during the period 2009-10 and is presently in his possession which has not only been illegally acquired and possessed but is also being used by the petitioner. Such finding, according to Mr. Sibal, is not based on any concrete evide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to his aforesaid contention has relied upon the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary Others versus Union of India reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 929, wherein it has been held that any property can be termed as proceeds of crime u/s 2 (1)(u) of PMLA, 2002 only when it can be shown to have been derived from the scheduled offences. 9. Reverting back to the nature of the land in question it has been submitted that the same is a Bhuinhari land which cannot be sold or transferred u/s 48 of the CNT Act which imposes a complete restriction on transfer of Bhuinhari Tenure Land . As per the records the land belongs to the Pahan family which fact has been reinforced by virtue of the order dated 29.01.2024 passed in SAR Case No. 81/2023-24 in terms of Section 71A of the CNT Act. Since the possession of Raj Kumar Pahan and Others have been restored which continues to operate and is binding on all authorities the entire case of the Enforcement Directorate of the involvement of the petitioner in a case of money laundering gets obliterated. The statements recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 cannot overwhelm the finding recorded by the quasi judicial authority. 10. Mr. Sibal, in course of his submission has p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mr. S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General of India has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and has given a brief background with respect to the application given on 04.05.2023 in terms of Section 66(2) of PMLA, 2002 and on receiving such communication the Circle Officer, Bargain, Ranchi had instituted a First Information Report wherein mention has been made of 17 volumes of Register-II having been found tampered. Several victims have come forward to submit their claims with supporting documents. Mr. Raju has brought to the notice of the Court the formal FIR and has submitted that Section 120B IPC was added and subsequently deleted in spite of the fact that conspiracy was mentioned therein. It has been submitted that the contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that there is absence of any predicate offence is a misnomer and absurd. In course of investigation, it was detected that in several cases the nature of the land had been changed by manufacturing false and back dated deeds and in course of investigation handwritten notes/diaries and mobile phones containing incriminating evidences relating to properties acquired by highly placed persons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statement of Hilariyas Kachhap gets corroborated by the statements of Manoj Kumar, Circle Officer, Bargain, Uday Shankar, PPS CMO and Abishek Prasad @ Pinto the press advisor of the petitioner and it gets co-related with the statement of Bhanu Pratap Prasad recorded at para 8.1 of the prosecution complaint. As per Manoj Kumar, Circle Officer Bargain, he had received directions from Uday Shankar, PPS CMO to get the property verified and that Hilariyas Kachhap looks after the said land measuring 8.86 acres on behalf of the petitioner. According to Mr. Raju, the link between the petitioner and his accomplices gets strengthened further in the statement of Uday Shankar, PPS, CMO that instruction to Manoj Kumar, Circle Officer, Bargain to verify the land was given by him on the direction of Abishek Kumar @ Pinto whose statement corroborates the said fact. The chain of events clearly categorizes the involvement of the petitioner. He has referred to Section 110 of the Evidence Act in order to contend that the presumption would be drawn that the petitioner is the owner of 8.86 acres of land since the petitioner has failed to discharge his burden that he is not the owner. It has been submitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r) No. 68 of 2024, wherein according to Mr. Raju an identical contention was raised when the arrest of the petitioner was challenged and all such issues were decided against the petitioner. He has extensively referred to the said order to support his submission. He has copiously referred to the petition filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the petitioner against the order dated 03.05.2024 passed in W.P.(Cr) No. 68 of 2024 specifically with respect to the contents of Ground-D and Ground-K of the said petition. The consistent plea of the petitioner that at best it can be a case of forcible occupation and thus no case is made out under the PMLA, 2002 seems to have been stonewalled by virtue of the averments made in the said ground as illegal acquisition is the main contention of the petitioner which also is the case of the Enforcement Directorate. The acceptance of the fact that Bhuinhari Land is non-transferable under the CNT Act and that non-tribals had got their names wrongly mutated/entered in the revenue records during the period 1978-1986 is also palpable from the averments made in Ground-K . It has been submitted that the grounds which have been propounded in the insta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r that the Arresting Officer himself was confused . It has been submitted by Mr. Raju that the Division Bench had categorically held that at this stage it is not possible to hold that the Enforcement Directorate has proceeded against the petitioner for no reasons. While referring to Section 19 PMLA, 2002 submission has been advanced that the Division Bench finding is categorical that sufficient materials are available indicating the guilt of the petitioner and the reason to believe in the backdrop of such finding gets substantiated. In fact, once the cognizance has been taken on 04.04.2024 the bar u/s 45 PMLA, 2002 kicks in thus disentitling the plea of the petitioner for grant of bail. The condition u/s 45 PMLA, 2002 with respect to propensity to commit an offence to dispel the plea of bail sought for is also demonstrated from the fact that the petitioner had instituted a criminal case against the Enforcement Directorate officials being SC/ST P.S. Case No. 06/2024. The conduct of the petitioner has further been highlighted to the effect that 10 opportunities were given to the petitioner to record his statement but he did not comply with 8 such opportunities and finally his stateme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t statements u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 are admissible. According to him, this submission is further fortified by the judgment of Delhi High Court dated 06.04.2023 in the case of Satyendra Kumar Jain versus Directorate of Enforcement reported in 2023 SCC OnLine Del 1953, Rohit Tandon versus Directorate of Enforcement reported in 2018 11 SCC 46 and Tarun Kumar versus Assistant Director Directorate of Enforcement (supra) validates the said submission. 21. The Court at the stage of bail cannot get into the credibility and reliability of witnesses put up by the prosecution and the case of Satish Jaggi versus State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2007) 11 SCC 195, is a pointer to that aspect. CBI versus V. Vijay Sai Reddy reported in (2013) 7 SCC 452, has been referred to show case the submission that for grant of bail the legislature has used the words reasonable grounds for believing instead of the evidence and that non-arrest/non-arraying of the co-accused is not a ground for bail to another accused. 22. Even statements u/s 161 Cr.P.C. are required to be considered while adjudicating upon a bail application and in support of such submission reference has been made to the case of Salim Khan versu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2012) 10 SCC 517. 27. Mr. Raju, learned ASGI based on his extensive submission has concluded that the dominant features of the case do not entitle the petitioner to the grant of bail and, therefore, this application deserves to be dismissed. 28. Miss Meenakshi Arora, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has sought to negate the submission of the learned ASGI by firstly referring to the order of the Division Bench dated 03.05.2024 in W.P.(Cr.) No. 68 of 2024 and submitting that Section 19 PMLA, 2002 and Section 45 PMLA, 2002 are intrinsically different as the said provisions are invoked and operate at different stages. She has submitted, in such context, that the prosecution complaint was filed by the Enforcement Directorate post the order passed in W.P.(Cr.) No. 68 of 2024 and it goes without saying that cognizance was taken at a later stage. This would be evident from the finding recorded by the Division Bench to the effect that at this juncture, a prosecution complaint is yet to be filed and the result of the investigation in Sadar P.S. Case No. 272 of 2023 is awaited . It has been submitted that the order in W.P.(Cr.) No. 68 of 2024 was delivered on 03.05.2024 and during th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the WhatsApp chat between Binod Singh and the petitioner. Continuous possession of the petitioner as assigned to the petitioner in para 10.29 of the prosecution complaint is also a misnomer and is scuttled in absence of any concrete evidence. The learned Senior Counsel has briefly taken the Court through the statements u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 and has submitted that the absence of any other evidence obscures the validity of such statements. The Electric Meter was in the name of Hilariyas Kachhap and Raj Kumar Pahan had a registered document of the year 2015 and the purported acquisition and possession of the petitioner over the said land cannot be inferred. In fact, at the time, when the summons were issued to the petitioner he came to be informed in December, 2023 about the subject matter of the case. Referring to the case of Rohit Tandon versus Directorate of Enforcement (supra), it has been submitted that a formidable case was made out against the said accused but the test of formidability is absent in the case of the petitioner. This observation finds reflected in the case of Tarun Kumar versus Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement (supra) as well. 31. Miss Arora has re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectly or indirectly attempted to indulge or knowingly assisted or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in one or more of the following processes or activities connected with proceeds of crime, namely- (a) concealment; or (b) possession; or (c) acquisition; or (d) use; or (e) projecting as untainted property; or (f) claiming as untainted property, in any manner whatsoever; (ii) the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted property or claiming it as untainted property in any manner whatsoever.] 34. Section 2 (1)(u) and Section 2 (1)(v) defines Proceeds of Crime and Property respectively and the same reads as under : 2. Definitions.-(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,- ............... (u) proceeds of crime means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property [or where such property is taken or held outside the country, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re language of section 3 of the 2002 Act, it is amply clear that the offence of money-laundering is an independent offence regarding the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime which had been derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity relating to or in relation to a scheduled offence. The process or activity can be in any form-be it one of concealment, possession, acquisition, use of proceeds of crime as much as projecting it as untainted property or claiming it to be so. Thus, involvement in any one of such process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime would constitute offence of money-laundering. This offence otherwise has nothing to do with the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence-except the proceeds of crime derived or obtained as a result of that crime. 270. Needless to mention that such process or activity can be indulged in only after the property is derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity (a scheduled offence). It would be an offence of money- laundering to indulge in or to assist or being party to the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime; and such process or activity in a given fact situati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... crime need not be an accused in the scheduled offence. Such an accused can still be prosecuted under PMLA so long as the scheduled offence exists. Thus, the second contention raised by the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant on the ground that the appellant was not shown as an accused in the chargesheets filed in the scheduled offences deserves to be rejected. 37. In the present case it all started with the investigation into the fraudulent acquisition of land which was in possession of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India and this led to identifying some private persons in connivance with government officials which were part of a land grabbing syndicate and whose involvement ranged from falsification of government records to tampering with the original revenue records. Recoveries were effected from the premises of Bhanu Pratap Prasad, Revenue Sub Inspector, Circle Office, Baragain, Ranchi which included property documents and 17 original registers (Register-II). This led to registration of Sadar P.S. Case No. 272/23. The documents seized according to the Enforcement Directorate manifested in a trail designating the role of the petitioner in the illegal acqu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nately for the accused, this is not the scheme of the Act . 38. Since the order dated 03.05.2024 passed in W.P.(Cr.) No. 68 of 2024 has been extensively referred to by the learned Additional Solicitor General of India stressing primarily on the binding nature of the said order upon this Court particularly with respect to the findings recorded in each of the issues, the said order has been perused. The prayer in the writ application, varied though it is, can be summed up primarily to focus on the issuance of summons to the petitioner which according to the petitioner was illegal and in colourable exercise of power as well as vindictive and to declare the arrest and continued detention of the petitioner as unwarranted, arbitrary and violative of Article-21 of the Constitution of India. The fundamental issue was with respect to Section 19 PMLA, 2002. When W.P.(Cr.) No. 68 of 2024 was heard on 28.02.2024, the prosecution complaint was not filed by the Enforcement Directorate but the same was subsequently filed on 30.03.2024 and, cognizance was taken. Thus an entirely new scenario has emerged with the filing of the prosecution complaint and the supplementary prosecution complaint. The p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shankar and Abhishek Kumar @ Pintu. 40. At this juncture, it would be apt to refer to the statements recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 which primarily concentrates on the purported acquisition and possession of 8.86 acres of land at Bargain by the petitioner. The statement of Bhanu Pratap Prasad was recorded on several occasions and without going into the details of such statements, what can be culled out is that on a verbal direction from Manoj Kumar, Circle Officer, Bargain he had verified the property having 8.86 acres and he as well as the Anchal Aamin had admitted that they had come to know that the land belonged to the present petitioner. It would evident from the statement of Bhanu Pratap Prasad that his involvement in forging and manipulation of government records had spread its tentacles to a wider spectrum and not particularly to only 8.86 acres of land which is the subject matter of the present case. 41. The statement of the petitioner seems to reveal complete denial of the allegation of acquisition and possession of 8.86 acres of land at Baragain. He had also denied of having any acquaintance with Bhanu Pratap Prasad. He had denied of having any knowledge about the retrieved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evidence on affidavits; (e) issuing commissions for examination of witnesses and documents; and (f) any other matter which may be prescribed. (2) The Director, Additional Director, Joint Director, Deputy Director or Assistant Director shall have power to summon any person whose attendance he considers necessary whether to give evidence or to produce any records during the course of any investigation or proceeding under this Act. (3) All the persons so summoned shall be bound to attend in person or through authorised agents, as such officer may direct, and shall be bound to state the truth upon any subject respecting which they are examined or make statements, and produce such documents as may be required. (4) Every proceeding under sub-sections (2) and (3) shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of Section 193 and Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). (5) Subject to any rules made in this behalf by the Central Government, any officer referred to in sub-section (2) may impound and retain in his custody for such period, as he thinks fit, any records produced before him in any proceedings under this Act: Provided that an Assistant Director or a Depu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a duly-signed statement. Thus statements under Section 50 of the PMLA carry much more weight than a statement recorded under Section 161CrPC. These are specific legislations enacted to handle specific crimes. 47. In Sanjay Jain versus Enforcement Directorate reported in 2024 SCC Online Del 1656 the extent of reliance to be placed in a statement recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 was considered and it was held as follows: 55. In Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement, (2023) 4 HCC (Del) 66 this Court held that though the statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA are admissible in evidence but their evidentiary value has to be weighed at the time of trial. The Court did not look into the contradictions in the testimony of the witnesses observing that the Court cannot appreciate the evidence meticulously but at the same time observed that the Court cannot take the statements under Section 50 of the PMLA as gospel truth and only broad probabilities have to be seen. Accordingly, the Court did not make any comment on such contradictions observing that the trial is yet to take place. The relevant part of the decision reads thus: 55. This Court is fully conscious of the fact that pers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ejudice the trial. (emphasis supplied) 56. The principle that emerges from Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra), as well as the above decisions as regards the statement recorded under Section 50 of the Act is that such statements are recorded in a proceeding which is deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of Section 193 and Section 228 of the Penal Code, 1860 and is admissible in evidence. The said statements are to be meticulously appreciated only by the Trial Court during the course of the trial and there cannot be a mini-trial at the stage of bail. However, when the statements recorded under Section 50 of PMLA are part of the material collected during investigation, such statements can certainly be looked into at the stage of considering bail application albeit for the limited purpose of ascertaining whether there are broad probabilities, or reasons to believe, that the bail applicant is not guilty. Meaning thereby, the statements under Section 50 of the PMLA have to be taken at their face value, but in case any such statement is patently self-contradictory or two separate statements of the same witness are inconsistent with each other on material aspects, then such c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Central Government by a general or special order made in this behalf by that Government. [(1-A) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), or any other provision of this Act, no 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. [Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is clarified that the expression Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable shall mean and shall be deemed to have always meant that all offences under this Act shall be cognizable offences and non-bailable offences notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), and accordingly the officers authorised under this Act are empowered to arrest an accused without warrant, subject to the fulfilment of conditions under section 19 and subje ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the accused and not as to whether those materials are credible or not on the merits. 50. In the case of Nimmagadda Prasad versus Central Bureau of Investigation (supra), it has been held as under : 24. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the legislature has used the words reasonable grounds for believing instead of the evidence which means the court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy itself as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 51. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... granted did not have to be indicated.' We respectfully agree with the above dictum of this Court. We also feel that such expression of prima facie reasons for granting bail is a requirement of law in cases where such orders on bail application are appealable, more so because of the fact that the appellate court has every right to know the basis for granting the bail. Therefore, we are not in agreement with the argument addressed by the learned counsel for the accused that the High Court was not expected even to indicate a prima facie finding on all points urged before it while granting bail, more so in the background of the facts of this case where on facts it is established that a large number of witnesses who were examined after the respondent was enlarged on bail had turned hostile and there are complaints made to the court as to the threats administered by the respondent or his supporters to witnesses in the case. In such circumstances, the Court was duty- bound to apply its mind to the allegations put forth by the investigating agency and ought to have given at least a prima facie finding in regard to these allegations because they go to the very root of the right of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expansive meaning not only protects life and liberty but also envisages a fair procedure. Liberty of a person should not ordinarily be interfered with unless there exist cogent grounds therefor. Sub- section (4) of Section 21 must be interpreted keeping in view the aforementioned salutary principles. Giving an opportunity to the Public Prosecutor to oppose an application for release of an accused appears to be reasonable restriction but clause (b) of sub-section (4) of Section 21 must be given a proper meaning. 36. Does this statute require that before a person is released on bail, the court, albeit prima facie, must come to the conclusion that he is not guilty of such offence? Is it necessary for the court to record such a finding? Would there be any machinery available to the court to ascertain that once the accused is enlarged on bail, he would not commit any offence whatsoever? 37. Such findings are required to be recorded only for the purpose of arriving at an objective finding on the basis of materials on record only for grant of bail and for no other purpose. 38. We are furthermore of the opinion that the restrictions on the power of the court to grant bail should not be pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceeds of crime are involved in money laundering. Such conditions enumerated in Section 45 of PML Act will have to be complied with even in respect of an application for bail made under Section 439 Cr. P.C. in view of the overriding effect given to the PML Act over the other law for the time being in force, under Section 71 of the PML Act. 55. In Vijay Madanlal Choudhary Others versus Union of India (supra), the broad probabilities based on the materials collected during investigation is to be considered and while reiterating the observations made in Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma , it was concluded thus: 401. We are in agreement with the observation made by the court in Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma (supra). The court while dealing with the application for grant of bail need not delve deep into the merits of the case and only a view of the court based on available material on record is required. The court will not weigh the evidence to find the guilt of the accused which is, of course, the work of Trial Court. The court is only required to place its view based on probability on the basis of reasonable material collected during investigation and the said view will not be taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the end of the trial and not at the stage of bail. The twin conditions of Section 45 do not put an absolute restrain on the grant of bail or require a positive finding qua guilt. 36. A bare perusal of the Section 2(u) of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2005 which provides for the definition of proceeds of crime indicates that it is the property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly which relates to criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. Similarly in order to be punished under Section 3 of the PMLA, it is necessary that person dealing with the proceed of crime must have some knowledge that it is tainted money. Though, the direct evidence in this regard may not be possible and the court is also conscious of the fact that at this stage, the evidence cannot meticulously be examined for this purpose. At the same time, for the purpose that evidence cannot be meticulously examined at this stage, the court cannot merely proceed on the basis of assumption. There has to be some substantial link between the money received and criminal activity relating to scheduled offence which can be attributed to the petitioner. 58. The plethora of judgments cited by the learn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... others had forcibly got them evicted in the year 2009-10 and the complaints made were not entertained by the Police. It is indeed surprising as to how these persons could purchase the land when admittedly it is a Bakast Bhuinhari land which is non-transferrable in terms of Section 48 of the CNT Act. The verification of the land as ostensively done at the behest of the petitioner is traced back to Abhishek @ Pintu, the Press Advisor and whose initiation of such verification ultimately reached Bhanu Pratap Prasad through various intermediaries, which is apparent from the statement of such persons recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002. As per the allegations emanating from the statements of the persons recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002, the petitioner had acquired and possessed the land comprising of 8.86 acres in the year 2010 and the boundary wall was also constructed and it seems that only during the tenure of Bhanu Pratap Prasad, Revenue Sub Inspector, Circle Office, Bargain, Ranchi there was a necessity to verify the land in question which seems to be farfetched and with an intent to prosecute the petitioner. The Electric Meter installed in the said premises is in the name of Hilariyas Kachhap and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the backdrop of the allegation that the land was already acquired and possessed by the petitioner as per some of the statements recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 and that too from the year 2010 onwards. 63. The consequence of the findings recorded by this Court satisfies the condition as at Section 45 PMLA, 2002 to the effect that there is reason to believe that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence as alleged. So far as the condition that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail reference is once again made to the case of Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma versus State of Maharashtra Another (supra) which has interpreted such provision as under: 38. .... The satisfaction of the court as regards his likelihood of not committing an offence while on bail must be construed to mean an offence under the Act and not any offence whatsoever be it a minor or major offence. If such an expansive meaning is given, even likelihood of commission of an offence under Section 279 of the Penal Code, 1860 may debar the court from releasing the accused on bail. A statute, it is trite, should not be interpreted in such a manner as would lead to absurdity... 64. Though the conduct of the pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
