0

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Chartered Accountant Accused of Money Laundering 

Blog , , , , ,

Case Title: Manish Kothari (Presently in JC) v. Director of Enforcement, Ministry of Finance, Dept. of Revenue Headquarter Investigation Unit 

Date of Decision: 22nd September 2023 

Case Number: Bail Application 2341 of 2023 

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma 

 

Introduction 

   

This case revolved around a bail application filed under Section 439 read with Section 167(2) and Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) by Manish Kothari, the petitioner, who was in judicial custody. The petitioner sought bail in connection with CT Case No. 13/2022-ECR/KLZ0/41/2020 dated 25/09/20 under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). 

 

Factual Background 

  

The petitioner’s bail application had been previously dismissed by the Special Judge on 09.06.2023. The dismissal was primarily based on the ground that the petitioner failed to meet the threshold of Section 45 of the PMLA. The trial court had held that the petitioner actively assisted co-accused individuals in converting illicit funds into legitimate money and was involved in money laundering. 

 

Additionally, the trial court considered the case a serious economic offense, emphasizing that the petitioner could not be treated differently under the proviso clause of Section 45 of the PMLA, which deals with the share of an accused in the tainted money. The trial court was of the opinion that the petitioner’s role was connected to a substantial amount, approximately Rs. 48 Crores, attributed to the co-accused Anubrata Mondal and his daughter Sukanya Mondal. 

 

Legal Issues 

   

  1. Whether the petitioner meets the criteria for bail under Section 45 of the PMLA? 
  2. Is there sufficient evidence to establish the petitioner’s involvement in money laundering? 
  3. Are the statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA admissible as evidence?

 

Contentions of the Petitioner 

   

  • The petitioner’s counsel argued that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen and a qualified chartered accountant with no prior criminal record.  
  • The petitioner provided professional services to Anubrata Mondal and his family, primarily related to income tax filing.  
  • The petitioner’s role was limited to filing income tax returns and was not involved in any illegal activities.  
  • The prosecution’s case is based mainly on statements of co-accused individuals, which contain contradictions and should not be relied upon.  
  • The petitioner’s arrest grounds were not supplied to him, violating his rights. 

 

Arguments by the Prosecution 

   

  • The prosecution argued that the petitioner played a significant role in managing the finances of Anubrata Mondal and his family in connection with the proceeds of crime generated from illegal activities like cross-border cattle smuggling.  
  • They alleged that the petitioner helped in projecting tainted money as untainted and participated in the creation of benami assets and companies for laundering the proceeds of crime.  
  • The prosecution emphasized the seriousness of economic offenses and the need to treat them differently. 

 

Observation and Analysis 

   

The court observed that at the bail stage, it should consider the probability of the accused’s guilt and whether they are likely to commit further offenses while on bail. The court should not conduct a detailed examination of evidence or make definitive findings of innocence.  

   

The petitioner’s role as a chartered accountant primarily involved tax-related services. The court noted that the allegations against the petitioner did not involve activities beyond the scope of his profession. The veracity of the prosecution’s case and the shifting of blame by co-accused should be evaluated during the trial. 

 

Decision of the Court 

   

The court granted bail to the petitioner, considering the principles of broad probabilities and the prima facie nature of the case. The bail was granted with specific conditions, including surrendering the passport, providing contact information, and refraining from tampering with witnesses or engaging in criminal activities. 

 

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.” 

 

Written by – Ananya Chaudhary 

Click here to view judgment

0

The Bombay High Court at Goa grants bail to accused charged with raping a minor girl on grounds of recent statements of the victim and her mother taken under Sec 164 CrPC

Blog, blog ,

The Bombay High Court at Goa grants bail to accused charged with raping a minor girl on grounds of recent statements of the victim and her mother taken under Sec 164 CrPC

Title: Sunil Vithal v. State of Goa

Decided on: July 11, 2023

Citation: 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1365

CORAM: HON’BLE JUSTICE M.S. KARNIK

Introduction

The Bombay High Court at Goa granted bail to an accused charged with offences under Section 376(3) of the Penal Code, 1860, Section 8(2) of the Goa Children’s Act, Sections 4, 6 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) against a minor girl.

Facts of the Case

This is an application for bail for offences punishable under Sections Section 376(3) of the Penal Code, 1860, Section 8(2) of the Goa Children’s Act, Sections 4, 6 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The victim’s age at the time was 10 years and the accused’s was 46 years. The offence against the victim girl was committed in August 2020 when the victim had gone with her parents during Ganesh Chaturthi at the house of the accused where the victim’s mother was working as a house help. The incident was reported in May 2023 by the victim to the Counsellor of the boarding school. Apparently, the victim was traumatised and, therefore, did not earlier inform or report the incident to anyone.

Court Analysis and Judgement:

The Court took into account that after the applicant was arrested on 06.05.2023 and the investigation was completed, the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of Cr. P.C. on 11.05.2023. In this statement, the victim stated that no incident has occurred with respect to her and she does not have any grievance or any complaint against anybody. The victim’s mother, in her statement, stated that she was not aware of any such incident that had taken place. The victim also refused to undergo a medical examination. The Court took into account all of these factors but refrained from making any observations on the merits of the contentions. The observations were limited to the consideration of this bail application and by taking an overall view of the matter, the applicant was released on bail for a bond of Rs. 25000.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Reema Nayak

 

0

The Bombay High Court at Goa grants bail to accused for not being a flight risk, having no criminal antecedents and after considering that the trial might take a long period

Uncategorized ,

The Bombay High Court at Goa grants bail to accused for not being a flight risk, having no criminal antecedents and after considering that the trial might take a long period

Title: Joyal Graca v. State of Goa

Decided on: July 5, 2023

Citation: 2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1341

CORAM: HON’BLE JUSTICE M.S. KARNIK

Introduction

The Bombay High Court at Goa grants bail to the main accused in a murder case in bail hearing.

Facts of the Case

This is an application for bail for offences punishable under Sections 323, 427, 364, 302, 201 read with 34 of the Penal Code, 1860. There are three accused in all who have alleged to have had a fight with the deceased in a bar. It is alleged that the deceased was taken by the accused on a scooter. The dead body of the deceased was found and a murder weapon was recovered.

Court Analysis and Judgement:

The Court takes into account that the trial has commenced and 12 witnesses have been examined. However, the Court make the following observations: 1. some of the witnesses have turned hostile during the course of their examination, 2. there are no eyewitnesses to the incident, 3. the applicant has been in custody for more than 3 years and 288 days. The Court also states that considering the number of witnesses, the trial is likely to take long time to conclude. Meanwhile, there are no criminal antecedents against the applicant. The Court also finds that the applicant is a permanent resident of Goa and there is nothing on record to indicate that he is flight-risk. Therefore, the court grants him bail on a bond of the sum of Rs. 25000.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by- Reema Nayak

Click to view the judgement

0

Despite not taking a side on the merits of the case, the court considers that the applicant has made a case for bail. – Gujarat High court

Blog ,

TITLE: Sanjaykumar Mahobatji Solank V state of Gujarat

Decided On-: July18, 2023

20815 of 2022

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr. Ilesh Vora

INTRODUCTION- The applicant seeks regular bail in connection with the FIR for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(n), 376(3), and 114 of the IPC as well as Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act through this subsequent application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

FACTS OF THE CASE

According to the prosecution’s case, the victim was lured by applicant-accused number 1 and then kidnapped, taken to various locations, and maintained a sexual relationship with. Three people were charged with the aforementioned offences in accordance with the FIR. The applicant in this case was taken into custody on February 27, 2022, and has been there ever since. The victim’s statement was recorded by the knowledgeable trial court after the charge was framed, and it is presented with the paperbook at page No. 1 of this application.

COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

 The applicant’s knowledgeable attorney, this is a case of a love affair and the victim has not fully backed up the prosecution’s case because during the cross-examination, she categorically denied the act of sexual relationship that is allegedly being made against the applicant. Given these facts, a knowledgeable defense attorney for the applicant, argued that since the applicant has been imprisoned since February 27, 2022, the issue of interfering with the prosecution’s evidence has not arisen.

However, the learned APP for the respondent-State, Ms. Asmita Patel, vehemently opposed the applicant’s request for bail and argued that because the applicant had previously withdrew the application and there are no new circumstances to consider, the court cannot at this time grant him the benefit of bail while the trial is ongoing. this submission. She therefore urged that, given the victim’s age and the seriousness and gravity of the offence, no judicial Discretion may be used in the applicant’s favour.

It appears that she changed her story during the cross-examination after hearing knowledgeable solicitors representing the various parties and after reading the documentation submitted, including the victim’s deposition. Therefore, this Court considers it inappropriate to discuss the merits of the case while the trial is ongoing. Therefore, this Court believes that the applicant has made a case for bail despite not having a position on the case’s merits.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by-  Steffi Desousa

Click here to view judgement