BABULAL PARASHURAMPURA Vs. STATE BY GANDHINAGAR POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Senior Advocate, Sri Ravi B. Naik, appearing for the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor. The petitioners are before this Court seeking anticipatory bail in the background that they are successful businessmen and are living as a joint family. It transpires that their house was raided by the Gandhinagar Police, Bellary, and it was found that there was a large amount of cash which exceeded Rs. 8 crores in the possession of the petitioners, apart from shares and other materials in respect of large bank deposits. The same were taken into custody and the Police have initiated proceedings alleging offences under various provisions of law including the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961; the Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004, the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 apart from the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(2.) It is in this background that the petitioners had approached the Court below seeking anticipatory bail, which has been rejected on the footing that the petitioners are capable of hampering the investigation and tampering with evidence and that reports were awaited from the Reserve Bank of India and the Income Tax Department for the prosecution to take further steps in the matter and that since a large volume of material had been seized at the time of raid, it would require a close perusal and unless the petitioners co-operate in the investigation, no further progress could take place and hence, the Court below has formed an opinion that enlarging the petitioners or granting the petitioners anticipatory bail would only enable them to keep out of the reach of law and hence had proceeded to reject the application. Hence, the present petition.

(3.) The learned Senior Advocate would point out that admittedly more than a sum of Rs. 8 crores in hard cash has been seized. It is in the interest of the petitioners to safeguard their money. It is also his case that the entire amount of cash that has been seized can be accounted for and that they are Income tax assesses and they have nothing to fear insofar as the allegations under the various provisions of law are concerned and it is only an apprehension that on the pretext of long drawn out investigation, the petitioners may be indefinitely taken into custody, the petitioners had approached the Court below for anticipatory bail and that their apprehension continues and hence, the present petition.