VUPPALAPATI VENKATA RAMA RAO Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the facts of the case in both these Criminal Petitions are identical and since they arise out of the same crime number, both these Criminal Petitions filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Heard the submissions of Sri L.Ravichander, learned senior counsel appearing for Sri P.Gautham, learned counsel for petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5977 of 2021 and Sri M.Abhinay Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5978 of 2021, Sri Anil Prasad Tiwari, learned Special Public Prosecutor for Enforcement Directorate, Hyderabad, appearing for respondent No.1 in Criminal Petition No.5977 of 2021 and sole respondent in Criminal Petition Nos.5978 of 2021 and perused the record.

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are falsely implicated in the subject case. They have nothing to do with the alleged offences, which are false and baseless. The petitioners hail from respectable families having deep roots in the society. They never indulged in any crime including the subject crime. It is submitted that present investigation is initiated by the Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad, vide File No.ECIR/HYZO/07/2018, on suspected commission of offence/s under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short "PML Act "). The lenders of M/s.VMC Systems Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'Company ') have unilaterally declared the account of the Company as 'Fraud ', without even providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and without providing 'forensic audit report ', which formed the basis for the said declaration. The action of declaring the account of the Company as 'fraud ', is sub judice before this Court in W.P.No.18649 of 2020, wherein, this Court was pleased to restrain all the lenders of the Company from taking any coercive action against the petitioners. Registering the subject crime against the petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of law. In fact, the petitioners, who are the promoters of the Company, made many sacrifices to the Company, including not drawing remuneration since a long time, much before the Company 's account was declared as NPA. Further, the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5977 of 2021 is a senior citizen aged about 79 years and suffering from various ailments. He is bedridden and cannot walk since the last one and half year. Further, he underwent various surgeries. In Badresh Bipinbhai Seth Vs. State of Gujarat (2016) 1 SCC 152, the Hon 'ble Apex Court held that Section 438 of Cr.P.C. and Article 21 of Constitution of India goes hand-in-hand, and that by enacting the provision for grant of anticipatory bail, the legislature has upheld the fundamental right of the citizens. The petitioners are permanent residents of Hyderabad and hence, there is no chance of fleeing away from justice. The petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ultimately prayed to allow the Criminal Petitions as prayed for.