You may also like...
-
Justice kanan lecture full video
by Sekar Reporter · Published September 10, 2020
-
The detail order made available on 21.08.2023 though runs to several pages, it does not contain the reasons for satisfaction of the twin condition imposed under Section 45 of PMLA Act. The allegation against this accused is that out of 169 consignments of coal, the accused has supplied totally 77 consignments through MMTC, 5 consignments directly by its offshore entities DNO, DMCC, Dubai and remaining 87 consignments were supplied by his Company M/s.Coastal Energyen Private Limited to the public sector undertaking in India and the over all inflation of price that is the difference between the inferior quality coal and the superior quality coal is arrived at Rs.564.58 Crores. Out of which 557.28 Crores had been diverted through his company M/s.Coastal Energyen Private limited and CNO groups of entities. The materials placed indicates at this juncture the accused cannot be presumed to be not guilty. The gravity of offence, the length and breath of crime committed has forced the Enforcement Directorate to request the trial Court to issue letter of rogatory and the trial Court had issued letter of request on 03.10.2022 to two countries. The responses from those countries are awaited. While so, it is incorrect to say that the Enforcement Directorate has not taken any steps to proceed with its investigation in respect of offshore entities. The delay in completing the investigation by the CBI, Delhi cannot be a ground to presume that accused is not guilty of money laundering offence. Closure of investigation in a similar case also cannot be a reason to presume that the present case will also end in closure report. Ifs and buts cannot be an adequate reason to hold this petitioner, not prima facie guilty of the alleged offence. No doubt personal liberty is a fundamental right of a person, yet, subject to reasonable restriction. Prolonged trial or incarceration pending trial is antithesis to fundamental right. However, the reasonable restriction and the interest of nation cannot be ignored while taking note of the fundamental right of individual. This Court is conscious of the dictum that, it is not the expectation of law that Court must arrive at a positive finding that applicant for bail has not committed an offence under PMLA Act and if such is the expectation, it will be impossible for an applicant to establish that he has not committed the offence. However, in this case, records reveal that about 169 consignments with inflated price being encashed fraudulently by this petitioner through his Company and the money has gone out of the country. The provisional attachment of the property by efflux of time had lost its enforceability and therefore if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, apart from repeating similar crime by floating new Company, the danger of he fleeing from the hands of justice also cannot be ruled out. For the reasons stated above, this Criminal Original Petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate is allowed. The order of the trial Court dated 16.08.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.6628 of 2023 granting bail to the respondent is hereby set aside. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also closed. 13.09.2023 Internet : Yes Index : Yes/No rkp To The XIII CBI Court, (Spl. Court for PMLA Cases), Chennai. 2.The Pubic Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai. Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. rkp Crl.O.P. No.19147 of 2023 and Crl. M.P. No.12883 of 2023 13.09.2023
by Sekar Reporter · Published September 13, 2023
-
Mhc advocate Durai vayaburi today full video www sekarreporter. Com
by Sekar Reporter · Published June 22, 2020