PAWAN KUMAR AGRAWAL, S/O SHRI RAMKUMAR AGRAWAL Vs. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE THROUGH I.O., ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE (FEMA / PMLA)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is first application under Sec. 438 of CrPC for grant of anticipatory bail to applicants as they apprehend their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.1/2021 filed under Sec. 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short 'the Act of 2002') based on Crime No. ECIR/RPSZO/01/2017 registered at Enforcement Directorate, Sub-zone Raipur, District Raipur (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Ss. 3 and 4 of the Act of 2002.

(2.) Case of prosecution, in brief, is that based on information received from Income Tax Department, FIR was registered by Economic Offence Wing / Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur against one Babulal Agrawal (IAS) for alleged commission of offence defined under Ss. 13 (1) (e) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. During search conducted by Income Tax Department, Babulal Agrawal was found in possession of huge cash and jewelleries. During investigation, Sunil Agrawal, Chartered Accountant of Babulal Agrawal, was found in possession of 230 bank pass-books of different persons, created 13 shell companies, which are controlled by Sunil Agrawal, Chartered Accountant of Babulal Agrawal, and M/s Prime Ispat Ltd. It also came to knowledge in investigation that Chartered Accountant Sunil Agrawal played significant role in opening of 446 bank accounts of various persons who are residents of rural areas. Huge money was deposited in those 446 bank accounts opened at Pandri and Ramsagarpara branches of Union Bank of India, Raipur within short period. Money from these accounts was firstly transferred to 13 shell companies and thereafter to M/s Prime Ispat Pvt. Ltd. as share capital. Total amount invested in M/s Prime Ispat Pvt. Ltd. through 13 shell companies was Rs.39,61,93,598.00 approximately. Initially police registered offence under Ss. 420, 468, 471 of IPC against Chartered Accountant Sunil Agrawal. After due investigation, complaint case under Sec. 45 of the Act of 2002 was also filed before the Court of competent jurisdiction against applicants and others including bank officials. After issuance of summons, applicants filed an application for grant of anticipatory bail before the Court below which came to be rejected vide order dtd. 25/11/2021.

(3.) Mr. Chirag Madan, learned counsel for applicants would submit that initially based on information supplied by Income Tax Department, an inquiry / investigation was conducted and FIR was registered against Sunil Agrawal, Chartered Accountant. Sunil Agrawal, Chartered Accountant of Babulal and M/s Prime Ispat Ltd., was arrested for commission of offence defined under Ss. 420, 468, 471 of IPC. Upon further investigation, involvement of applicants were also revealed based on material collected by non-applicant Department. A complaint case was filed before the Special Court under the Act of 2002. He submits that initially crime was registered only against Sunil Agrawal, Chartered Accountant. Perusal of entire material available in file either placed on behalf of applicants or non-applicant, there is no specific allegation against applicants. Applicants are not having any relation in opening of any of bank accounts, as alleged in complaint i.e. 446 bank accounts or in creating 13 shell companies. Applicants have participated during course of inquiry / investigation, provided documents, their statements under Sec. 50 of the Act of 2002 were also recorded. They have not avoided investigation process. As they have already participated in investigation proceedings, therefore, there is no chance of their fleeing away. After inquiry/investigation by non-applicant Department complaint case is filed, no custodial interrogation is required. Hence, applicants may be extended benefit of anticipatory bail under Sec. 438 of CrPC. In support of above contention, learned counsel places his reliance on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1; Nathu Singh v. State of UP reported in (2021) 6 SCC 64; Sunil Bharti Mittal v CBI reported in (2015) 4 SCC 609; Sharad Kumar Sanghi v. Sangita Rane reported in (2015) 12 SCC 781; Managing Director, Castrol India Ltd. vs. State of Karnataka reported in (2018) 17 SCC 275; Maksud Saiyed vs. State of Gujarat & ors reported in (2008) 5 SCC 668; Siddharth v State of UP reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 615; SLP (Crl) No.7665/2021 Shyam Sunder Singh v State of Jharkhand; State of Maharashtra vs. Nainmal Punjaji Shah reported in (1969) 3 SCC 904.