BISHNU KUMAR AGARWALA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner for the grant of regular bail for the offences registered under Ss. 3 and Sec. 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (herein after to be referred as PMLA).

(2.) Ms. S.D. Sanjay, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr. Anshuman Sinha and Indrajit Sinha, Advocates, while arguing on behalf of the Petitioner, invited attention of this Court to an F.I.R. being Sadar P.S. Case No. 399/2022 dtd. 8/9/2022 registered at the instance of one Umesh Gope for alleged offences under Ss. 406, 420, 467, 468, 447, 504, 506, 341, 323 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against various individuals including the petitioner. In the said F.I.R., Umesh Gope has alleged, inter alia, that various individuals including petitioner fraudulently acquired Plot of land having an area of 1.00 Acre (One Acre) situated at Plot No. 28, Khata No. 27 at Village Gari, Chesire Home Road, Sadar, Ranchi. In respect of aforesaid F.I.R., investigation was carried out by Sadar Police Station and Final Form No. 10 of 2023 dtd. 25/1/2023 was filed, wherein it was concluded by the Investigating Officer that none of the accused persons were required to be sent up for trial, as the concerned case was a civil dispute. The said Final Form was taken on record by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi and appropriate notice was issued to the Informant for his response. It has been submitted that in spite of the fact that in respect of aforesaid F.I.R., being F.I.R. No. 399 of 2022, Investigating Agency has submitted Final Form stating, inter alia, that as no case is made out, the Enforcement Directorate, on the basis of F.I.R. No. 399/2022 treating it to be a predicate offence registered an ECIR/RNZO/10/2023 dtd. 7/3/2023. It has been further submitted that the Petitioner, after registration of the aforesaid ECIR case, was summoned by Enforcement Directorate and he duly cooperated with the investigation. The Petitioner was summoned on several dates i.e. on 16/4/2023, 26/4/2023, 28/4/2023 and 8/5/2023 and even a search was conducted at the office and residential premises of the Petitioner. By placing reliance upon the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'Pankaj Bansal Vs. Union of India, reported in (2023) SCC OnLine 1244, it has been submitted that Petitioner all along cooperated with the investigation and, merely because Petitioner did not give reply in the manner as it suited the Enforcement Directorate (for short 'ED'), it cannot be said that Petitioner did not cooperate with the investigation.

(3.) It has been further submitted that despite the fact that Petitioner fully cooperated throghout the investigation, ED on 31/7/2023, arrested the Petitioner and, at the time of arrest, ED in contravention of Sec. 19(1) of PMLA Act, did not provide any written grounds of arrest to the Petitioner. It has been further submitted that on 1/9/2023, Respondent-ED filed prosecution complaint in ECIR No. RNZO/10/2023 before Special Judge, PMLA, Ranchi and Petitioner was arrayed as Accused No.9. At the time of filing of prosecution complaint, ED also merged another F.I.R. bearing No. 137 of 2023 registered with Hare Street Police Station, Kolkata under Ss. 120-B, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC. It has been vehemently submitted that the Petitioner has not been named as an accused and/or summoned in the said F.I.R.