HARI NARAYAN RAI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS bail application arises from Enforcement Case Information Report (in short ECIR) No. ECIR/01/PAT/09/AD registered u/s 3 read with Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (the Act for short).

(2.) MR . B. Poddar, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner submitted that the said act is not applicable, as the amendment was brought w.e.f. 1.6.2009, by which the alleged sections of Indian Penal Code and Prevention of Corruption Act were inserted, whereas the check period in the present case is prior to coming into force of the amendment i.e. between April, 2004 to 26.11.2008; that the petitioner is not continuing any criminal activity; that while the petitioner is in judicial custody since 17.8.2009 in Vigilance P.S. Case No. 26 of 2008 dated 26.11.2008 (Special Case No. 32 of 2008), the present case has been instituted on the basis of the Vigilance Case, which was instituted on the basis of Newspaper report alleging that the petitioner has acquired the assets illegally worth Rs. 30 Crores and odds, whereas in the chargesheet it is alleged that petitioner has accumulated the assets of Rs. 2.54 Crores only; that petitioner, his wife and other family members have filed returns before the Income Tax Department disclosing their income to the tune of Rs. 2.71 Crores that there is no allegation in the F.I.R. attracting the provisions of the Act and it has been filed without application of mind and without verifying the correct position; and that there is no chance of tampering with the evidence or absconding and there fore petitioner may be granted bay. He relied on the judgments reported in (2006)1 SCC 420, D.S.P., Chennai V/s. K. Inbasagaran, (1992)4 SCC 45; M. Krishna Reddy V/s. State Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hyderabad and (2000)6 SCC 338, State of M.P. V/s. Mohanlal Soni.

(3.) IN my opinion, the allegations against the petitioner are very serious. Sufficient material has Come against him. In the circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.