news details |
|
|
| Court grants interim bail to Lal Singh in money laundering case | | | 
Early Times Report
Jammu, Nov 23: Principal Sessions Judge Jammu Sanjay Parihar granted interim bail to former Minister and Dogra Swabhiman Sangathan Party (DSSP) supremo Lal Singh on Thursday.
Principal Sessions Judge Jammu Sanjay Parihar after hearing Adv Rajesh Kotwal for the applicant whereas Special PP Ashwani Khajuria for the ED, observed that property that is alleged to have resulted in yielding of crime proceeds has been valued at the time of transfer at Rs. 16 Lakhs only which is far less than the prescribed value of one crore as provided under proviso to Section 45. Considering the fact that petitioner is not involved in the predicate offence and the allegations of threat and intimidation sought to be attributed against the petitioner on the strength of statements given by donor under section 50 of the PMLA, that too being not on oath, would not be deemed as a sufficient material to come within the purview of reasonable grounds for believing the petitioner to be guilty.
The property stated to be POC has fallen to the domain of Trust in the year 2011 and thereafter till date of arrest of the petitioner nowhere it is discernable in the report given by the respondent that the petitioner had in any way indulged in creation of any other assets on the strength of the original criminal activity. In fact, the criminal activity forming the basis of “predicate offence” (registered by CBI) is completely different from the one projected by the respondent. There may be accusation that petitioner is involved in a serious offence, however, the material so produced in the report given by the respondent when examined on the touchstone of grant or declining of bail, leans in favour of petitioner who is presumed to be innocent until proved guilty by due process of law.
The court further observed that his case in the given factual backgrounds comes within the purview of proviso to Section 45 PMLA because the value of the property is less than 01 crore as there isn`t any proceeding against the petitioner having violated a fiscal statute of undervaluing immovable property. Even otherwise also his role is attributed only as an Attorney because the transfer has been affected from the donor in favour of the Trust. So, parties thereto are to be held accountable for undervaluation and not the petitioner. In that background denial of bail to the petitioner would give him an impression that he is being held guilty without trial.
The Court after considering the aforesaid facts coupled with the contention on behalf of the petitioner that in the present case the twin conditions as mentioned under section 45 of the PMLA are not attracted, in as much as the proceeds of crime is less than one crore and there is no likelihood of the petitioner to commit the same offence in future, in that background, petitioner who is in custody, his continuous incarceration is not going to serve the cause of the respondent. In that background, petitioner has been able to carve out a strong prima facie case for enlargement on interim bail as such the petitioner is admitted to interim bail, subject to furnishing surety for an amount of Rs. 02 lakhs with personal bond of the like amount, on the conditions that he shall remain present before the E.D as and when called and shall render all possible assistance in due investigation of the case. He shall not indulge in repetition of offence and refrain from intimidating or harassing the prosecution witnesses. In the event of any such claim of the respondent, the concession of bail is amenable to withdrawal. Court further ordered that he shall surrender his Passport before the E.D and directed to list the application on 14.12.2023. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
