Pmla

Stating that a building was also constructed on the property, Mr. Pathiyil said, the funds for the construction had originated from the petitioner, and they were of dubious origin. The ED also accused the petitioner of having evaded the summons during the investigation, leading to the issuance of a Look Out Circular.

‘Flight risk’
The SPP had told the sessions court that the petitioner was a flight risk and that he may abscond after flying to the United States. Even otherwise, the petitioner’s aim appeared to somehow delay the commencement of the trial in the money laundering probe against him by citing medical reasons, he added.

After recording his submissions, the Sessions Court had taken adverse note of the petitioner’s previous conduct in having evaded the summons issued by the ED and said that any delay in trial proceedings, due to the foreign travel, would adversely affect the other accused persons’ right to speedy trial.

“There is no proof for the claim that he will take treatment in the USA for about 15 days and will return immediately thereafter. Further, absolutely no material has been placed before this court to show that the treatment required is not at all available in India. In the absence of any medical emergency that the petitioner needs to get immediate treatment for in the USA, this court finds no justifiable reason for according permission to the petitioner to travel abroad,” the sessions court order read.