LAWS(PAT)-2020-8-12

RITLAL RAI Vs. U.O.I.

Decided On August 18, 2020
Ritlal Rai Appellant
V/S
U.O.I. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

(2.) In the present case, the petitioner has made a prayer for issuance of writ of Habeas Corpus or any other appropriate writ, order, direction for commanding the respondents to release the petitioner forthwith from Adarsh Jail, Beur, Patna where he is detained since 17.4.2013 in connection with Special Case No. 271 of 2018 arising out of Special Complaint Case No. 1 of 2013 instituted for an offence under Section ? of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (in short 'PML Act') which provides maximum sentence of 7 years pending before the Court of Special Judge as he has completed maximum sentence which could have been awarded under the PML Act after adjusting the period of provisional bail. It has further been claimed that this Court should declare the detention of the petitioner in connection with the aforesaid case is against the provision of Section 20(1) of the Constitution of India and second proviso to Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) The short fact involved in this case is that on 20.3.2013, the Deputy Director, Directorate Enforcement (Prevention of Money Laundering Act), Government of India filed a Complaint Case No. 1 of 2013 in the court of Sessions Judge cum Special Judge for offence punishable under Section 3 and 4 of the PML Act alleging therein that he received a communication that the petitioner has been charge-sheeted in 17 cases of the IPC , Arms Act and Explosive Substance Act and out of them, 7 relates to scheduled offences under the PML Act. It has further been alleged that he along with co-accused Rinku Devi have accumulated huge quantity of money amounting Rs. 1,06,62,022/- as well as acquired movable/immovable properties from the returns of the crime, thereby they have committed offence under the PML Act. From the complaint petition, it appears that the petitioner was involved in heinous crime of different nature on different occasion, details are as follows; Khagaul P.S. Case No. 91 of 2005 for offence under Sections 384 / 386 / 38 / 7 / 120B of the Indian Penal Code, Khagaul P.S. Case No. 55 of 2007 instituted for offence under Section 3 &