SATYENDAR KUMAR JAIN Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of applications filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. seeking bail by the petitioners Satyendar Kumar Jain, Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain for an offence punishable under Sec. 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the PMLA) in ED complaint bearing No.ECIR/HQ/14/2017 dtd. 30/8/2017 which was registered in pursuance of CBI case bearing FIR No. RC-AC-1-2017-A-0005 dtd. 24/8/2017.

(2.) The bail application filed by the petitioner Satyender Kumar Jain was rejected by the learned Special Judge (P.C. Act) (CBI) -23 (MPs/MLAs cases) vide a detailed order dtd. 17/11/2022 having regard to the mandatory twin conditions u/s 45 of the PMLA. The Ld. Special Judge prima facie opined that the applicant/accused Satyendar Kumar Jain was involved in concealing proceeds of crime by giving cash to Kolkata-based entry operators and thereafter, bringing the cash into the companies namely, M/s.Manglayatan Developers/Projects Pvt.Ltd., M/s. Akinchan Developers Pvt. Ltd. and M/s.Paryas Infosolutions Pvt. Ltd. against sale of shares to project that the income of these three companies was untainted. It was held by the Ld. Special Court, PMLA that apart from that, accused Satyendar Kumar Jain has also used the same modus operandi to convert his proceeds of crime of Rs.15,00,000.00 by receiving accommodation entries from Kolkatabased entry operators in his company M/s.J.J.Ideal Estate Pvt. Ltd. It was held that the applicant/accused Satyendar Kumar Jain had knowingly done such an activity to mask tracing of the source of the ill-gotten money and accordingly such proceeds of crime were layered through Kolkata based entry operators. It was further held that as and when during the check period, cash was paid by applicant/accused Satyendar Kumar Jain to the Kolkata based entry operators, the proceeds of crime stood generated. It is pertinent to mention that in the detailed bail order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, it was recorded that petitioner Satyendar Kumar Jain did not dispute that accommodation entry to the tune of Rs.4.61 Crore had been received during the check period in three companies namely, M/s.Manglayatan Projects Pvt.Ltd., M/s. Akinchan Developers Pvt.Ltd. and M/s.Paryas Infosolutions Pvt. Ltd. from Kolkata based entry operators against cash. The Ld. Special Judge has discussed in detail the statement of the witnesses recorded under Sec. 50 PMLA (2002).

(3.) Further, the Ld. Special Court, PMLA, vide separate order of the same date i.e. 17/11/2022, also rejected the bail applications of applicants/accused Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain, predominately on the ground that Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain knowingly assisted co accused Satyendar Kumar Jain in the concealment of proceeds of crime. It was held, inter alia, that it was prima facie established on record that cash for obtaining accommodation entries was paid by petitioners Satyendar Kumar Jain, Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain. Learned ASJ returned a finding that during the check period, even if the transactions were made by Vaibhav Jain and Akash Jain, the same were done by them on behalf of petitioner Satyendar Kumar Jain. It was held that the applicants/accused Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain projected the proceeds of the crime as untainted by claiming the proceeds of the crime to be their unaccounted income under IDS, 2016. In view thereof, Ld. Special Judge dismissed the bail applications of Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain.