9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 958X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce, is prima facie reflected. Hon'ble the Supreme Court while considering the gravity of economic offence in case of P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, [2019 (9) TMI 286 - SUPREME COURT] has held that 'Grant of anticipatory bail at the stage of investigation may frustrate the investigating agency in interrogating the accused and in collecting the useful information and also the materials which might have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the accused knows that he is protected by the order of the court. Grant of anticipatory bail, particularly in economic offences would definitely hamper the effective investigation. Having regard to the materials said to have been collected by the respondent-Enforcement Directorate and considering the stage of the investigation, we are of the view that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail.' Considering the FIR and other material placed on record, it prima facie shows involvement of the applicant in crime in question. As such, this is not a fit case where the applicant should be granted regular bail. Conclusion - i) The economic offences, due to their deliberate nature and impact on nationa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chaurasia, Director, Geology & Mining Department and with the backing of some political executives, they managed to make deliberate policy changes. As part of the well-planned conspiracy, the applicant with the active support of the politicians & some of the senior State Government functionaries, managed to influence the then Director of Geology & Mining, and got issued a Government Order dated 15.07.2020 which became the fountain head of this extortion system by converting the online system of issuance of Transport Permits into a manual system. They started a network of extortion to collect Rs. 25 per on every ton of coal transported in the State of Chhattisgarh. The investigation conducted by the Enforcement Directorate revealed that other senior bureaucrats viz., Smt. Saumya Chaurasia and Smt. Ranu Sahu, IAS were also involved in this conspiracy and were providing assistance to the applicant in running the extortion racket. Smt. Soumya Chourasiya while working as Deputy Secretary in the office of Chief Minister, had assisted the applicant and his associates in collecting the extortion money by posting pliable officers of mining department in the coal mining areas. Smt. Ranu Sahu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licant for commission of offence under Sections 7, 7A & 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended in 2018 (for short "the PC Act") read with Sections 420 & 120-B of IPC. 5. From the case diary and the material so collected by the ACB/EOW, the role of present applicant is that the applicant is uncle of Suryakant Tiwari and he used to keep the money received from illegal coal levy by Suryakant Tiwari and syndicate at his residence as per the instructions of Suryakant Tiwari and also used to deliver the share of illegal levy to bureaucrats and political persons on instructions of Suryakant Tiwari. Suryakant Tiwari has invested crores of rupees in illegal immovable properties in applicant's name and his family members from the amount collected by illegal coal levy. After the raid conducted by the Income Tax Department, the immovable properties purchased by the applicant in his own name as well as names of his family members were sold. In the search operation conducted by the Income Tax Department at the residence of Laxmikant Tiwari on 30.06.2022, approximately Rs. 6,44,38,000/- in cash and gold jewellery worth Rs. 3,24,61,655/-were seized. Similarly Rs. 52,35,000/- in c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. He would further submit that applicant was lodged in the Central Jail Raipur in connection of Crime No. ECIR/RP20/09/2022 dated 29.09.2022 under Sections 3 & 4 of the PMLA Act, 2002 in the same allegation as alleged in the present crime number also nothing new fact arose in the of present case. He would further submit that the applicant has been arrested in the Crime No. ECIR/RPZO/09/2022 on dated 13.10.2022. The applicant and Shiv Shankar Naag got the bail from Hon'ble the Supreme Court on 04.10.2024. He would further submit that the applicant at the time of registration of present Crime No. 3/2024 dated 17.01.2024 by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, was already behind the bar and on 11.06.2024, the applicant was arrested by the non-applicant in the aforesaid offence during judicial custody of Crime No. ECIR/RPZO/09/2022 at Central Jail Raipur (CG). Since then he is behind the bar. He would further submit that no ingredient of the alleged offence has been made out against the applicant in the present case. No act or conduct of the applicant proves commission of the offence alleged or suggests any kind of involvement in the case. He would further submit that the recovery had alre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sidence on 30.06.2022, approximately Rs. 6,44,38,000/- in cash and gold jewellery worth Rs. 3,24,61,655/- were seized. Similarly Rs. 52,35,000/- in cash was also recovered by the Income Tax Department from applicant's and his wife locker. He would further submit that the applicant is involved in the economical offence which is not only heinous offence but also against the economy of the nation. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is required as the applicant has not disclosed the source of income from where these properties which have been detailed in the final report and if the accused remained the custody, the sources of purchase of property can be traced out. He would further submit that the learned Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Raipur vide order dated 10.09.2024 while dismissing the bail application filed by the applicant has observed that there is involvement of the applicant in the crime in question, which has not been rebutted by the applicant while making this submission before this Court and would pray for rejection of bail petition. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants and the respondents as well as considered the case diary. 10. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g 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. 35. 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." [underlining added] 80. Referring to Dukhishyam Benupani, Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate (FERA) v. Arun Kumar Bajoria (1998) 1 SCC 52, in Enforcement Officer, Ted, Bombay v. Bher Chand Tikaji Bora and others (1999) 5 SCC 720, while hearing an appeal by the Enforcement Directorate against the order of the Single Judge of the Bombay High Court granting anticipatory bail to the respondent thereon, the Supreme Court set aside the order of the Single Judge granting anticipatory bail. 81. Gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Court in Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh and Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee (noted earlier). These decisions as well as the decision in Sanjay Chandra (supra) were adverted to in a recent decision of a two judge Bench of this Court dated 19 March 2021 in The State of Kerala v. Mahesh where the Court observed: "22...All the relevant factors have to be weighed by the Court considering an application for bail, including the gravity of the offence, the evidence and material which prima facie show the involvement of applicant for bail in the offence alleged, the extent of involvement of the applicant for bail, in the offence alleged, possibility of the applicant accused absconding or otherwise defeating or delaying the course of justice, reasonable apprehension of witnesses being threatened or influenced or of evidence being tempered with, and danger to the safety of the victim (if alive), the complainant, their relatives, friends or other witnesses...." Similarly, the Court held that the grant of bail by the High Court can be set aside, consistent with the precedents we have discussed above, when such grant is based on non-application of mind or is innocent of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
