DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT Vs. ADITYA TRIPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad in Criminal Petition Nos. 1146/2021 and 1147/2021, by which, the High Court has allowed the said bail applications and has directed to enlarge respective respondent No. 1 on bail in connection with the offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the PML Act, 2002) investigated by the Enforcement Directorate, Hyderabad in F. No. ECIR/HYZO/36/2020 on the file of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, the Directorate of Enforcement has preferred the present appeals.

(2.) That an FIR No. 12/2019 dtd. 10/4/2019 was registered by the Economic Offences Wing, Bhopal, naming about 20 persons/companies as accused for the offences punishable under Ss. 120-B, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC, Sec. 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sec. 7(c) read with Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It was found in the preliminary enquiry that eTender Nos. 91,93, and 94 for total works amounting to Rs.1769.00 crores of Madhya Pradesh Water Corporation were tempered to change the price bid of M/s GVPR Engineers Limited, M/s The Indian Hume Pipe Company Limited and M/s IMC (sic) Project India Limited to make them the lowest bidders. Subsequent to the registration of the FIR, Economic Offences Wing, Bhopal conducted investigation and filed the chargesheet before the competent court on 4/7/2019. That on study of chargesheet, it was found that the accused have also committed the offences under the PML Act, 2002 as the offences for which they were chargesheeted, namely, Ss. 120-B, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC and Sec. 7 read with Sec. 13(2) of the PC Act, are also scheduled offences and therefore, the Enforcement Directorate, Hyderabad had initiated money laundering investigation in the F. No.ECIR/HYZO/36/2020. That respective respondent No. 1 herein in respective appeals were arrested on 19/1/2021, therefore, they filed the present bail applications before the High Court to enlarge them on bail in connection with the aforesaid investigation/case being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate. By the impugned orders, the High Court has directed to enlarge respondent No. 1 in respective appeals on bail. The impugned orders passed by the High Court enlarging respondent No. 1 in respective appeals on bail in the case being investigated by the Enforcement Directorate, Hyderabad, are the subject matters of present appeals.

(3.) Shri K.M. Nataraj, learned ASG, has appeared on behalf of the appellant - Enforcement Directorate and Shri Rakesh Khanna and Shri Aman Lekhi, learned Senior Advocates have appeared on behalf of respective respondent No. 1.