HC refuses to grant bail in money laundering case due to pendency of investigation and non-cooperation of accused

  • Blog|News|FEMA & Banking|
  • 2 Min Read
  • By Chetan Kulasri
  • |
  • Last Updated on 10 September, 2021

Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002

Case details: Vijay Narendra Kumar Kothari v .Directorate of Enforcement - [2021] 129 taxmann.com 409 (Bombay)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

    • Sandeep K. Shinde, J. 
    • Dr. Sujay KantawalaSujit Sahoo and Aditya Talpade for the Applicant.
    • H.S. Venegaonkar, Adv. and S.R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

An FIR was lodged against the accused company and its directors under sections 420, 465, 467, 468, and 120B of IPC, 1860, The Investigation revealed that the accused company and its directors remitted Indian Currency illegally abroad by submitting bogus import documents.

The Directorate of Enforcement recorded a complaint under provisions of PMLA, 2002 against the accused company and its directors for investigation. However, the investigation revealed that the accused fraudulently remitted funds to a Hong Kong-based company by submitting forged bills of entry and other import documents to IndusInd Bank.

The Applicant sought for his enlargement on bail in a case registered by the Directorate of Enforcement for the offence of money laundering punishable under sections 3 and 4. However, the Applicant relied on orders granting bail to co-accused.

High Court Held

Since the accusations against the applicant were different and in fact, while granting bail to co-accused, Court had observed that the applicant was kingpin and primary role was attributed to him, and thus, orders, granting bail to co-accused did not further case of the applicant.

Moreover, the applicant had not co-operated in respect of financial information of overseas companies and investigation was still going on and there was the likelihood of applicant meddling with an investigation if released on bail and, therefore, in consideration of nature of accusations against the applicant, his conduct and non-cooperation in the investigation, the applicant was not to be released on bail.

List of Cases Referred to

    • Deepak Virendra Kochhar v. Directorate of Enforcement [Criminal Bail Application No. 1322 of 2020, dated 25-3-2021] (para 3)
    • Rana Kapoor v. Directorate of Enforcement [Criminal Bail Application No. (ST). 4999 of 2020, dated 25-1-2021] (para 9).

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com