Full Judgment Text
1
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
2023INSC808
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (Crl.) No.7561 of 2023
Bachhu Yadav .… Petitioner(s)
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement Government
of India Represented by its Assistant
Director (PMLA) & Anr. …. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated
5/21.03.2023 whereby the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in
Criminal Bail Application No.13289 of 2022 has rejected the prayer of
the petitioner for bail. It is in that light, the petitioner is before this
Court.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
Nisha Khulbey
Date: 2023.09.06
16:29:39 IST
Reason:
SLP(Crl.) No. 7561/2023
2
2.
Heard Sh. Basant R., learned senior counsel for the petitioner,
Sh. S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General for the respondent
and perused the petition papers.
3. The instant bail application is filed by the petitioner in respect of
the case registered in ECIR Case No. 04/2022 under Section 4 of the
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (‘PMLA’ for short). The said
case is registered against the petitioner as well as the other accused.
Insofar as the petitioner is concerned the allegation essentially is that
the petitioner has involved himself in the transportation of 1844
trucks/vehicles carrying stone chips during the period 01.06.2022 to
26.06.2022. In that regard, it is alleged that on the scrutiny of his
bank account it showed huge cash deposited, on 24.01.2022
amounting to Rs.30 lakhs. Thus, the respondents contending that the
said amount is proceeds of crime, has included the petitioner as an
accused in the instant case.
4. The learned senior counsel would contend that though the said
amount was available in his bank account, considering the period
during which the illegal activity is alleged against the petitioner, the
SLP(Crl.) No. 7561/2023
3
credit of Rs.30 lakh referred to is not during the said period but much
earlier, on 24.01.2022 and as such the said amount cannot be
classified as proceeds from crime. In that light, it is contended that the
very inclusion of the name of the petitioner as an accused is not
justified and in that light would contend that he is entitled to bail.
5. The learned Additional Solicitor General would however
vehemently oppose the grant of bail. It is contended that the petitioner
is a henchman of the main accused Pankaj Mishra who is indulging in
large-scale illegal mining and the petitioner is aiding such illegal
activities. In that regard, it is contended that the amount as indicated
to be found in the account of the petitioner is only a part of such ill-
gotten money and if the entire activities of illegal mining involving the
petitioner, led by the said Pankaj Mishra is taken into consideration
the amount would be to the extent of nearly 13 crores and as such the
arrest of the appellant is justified and his custody is required to be
continued.
6. In the light of the gist of the contentions noted above, we have
perused the petition papers, but without adverting to much details at
this stage since the basic facts required for considering an application
for bail alone is to be noted without effecting the main contentions of
SLP(Crl.) No. 7561/2023
4
the parties to be put forth during trial. The basic allegation as made
against the petitioner as noted is regarding the illegal activity during
the period 01.06.2022 to 26.06.2022. Though the learned Additional
Solicitor General with reference to the objection statement wherein
details of the FIR filed in three other cases is referred to indicate the
illegal activities in which the petitioner is involved, it is needless to
mention that in the said cases the proceedings in any event would be
taken against the petitioner to its logical conclusion.
7.
In that background, keeping in view the allegation against the
petitioner is of possessing the amount of Rs.30 lakh in his bank
account, apart from the fact that the very allegation is that the said
amount was deposited on 24.01.2022 which is prior to the period of
illegal activity alleged, for the present there is an explanation as put
forth by the petitioner during the course of investigation in answer to
the specific question on being confronted with the account details in
Jharkhand Gramin Bank, Bhagiamari Branch. The explanation is that
the amount was deposited by him in respect of the transaction for
purchase of house with land in Asansol for Rs.26 lakhs. It is further
stated that the sum of Rs.26,00,024/- was transferred through NEFT
to one Munmun Maji and it is stated that the said amount was the
SLP(Crl.) No. 7561/2023
5
sale consideration for the property. To enable transfer of the same, it
had been deposited in the bank account. At the point of hearing this
petition, it was stated across the bar that the sale has also been
registered. Be that as it may, these are aspects which, in any event,
would be looked at during the course of the trial.
8. Further, though the learned Additional Solicitor General has
contended that the bail application filed by the main accused Pankaj
Mishra has been dismissed by this Court on 26.04.2023 in Special
Leave Petition (Criminal) No.4682 of 2023, it is seen that the
application filed has in fact been withdrawn with liberty to file an
application for interim bail on medical ground and also to file afresh
bail application after six months. Be that as it may, in the instant
facts, the nature of the allegation in the present proceedings has been
taken note. In that circumstance, it is seen that the petitioner was
arrested on 05.08.2022 and he has spent a little over one year of
incarceration. The chargesheet is filed and the Trial Court having
framed the charges, no doubt has started the trial and it is stated
across the bar that five witnesses have been examined but it is also
stated that in all 42 witnesses are cited to be examined. In that
circumstance, taking into consideration all aspects of the matter and
SLP(Crl.) No. 7561/2023
6
also making it subject to the condition that the petitioner shall
diligently participate in the trial without interfering in the course of
justice and also complying with the other appropriate conditions to be
imposed by the trial court, the prayer is accepted.
9. Hence, we direct that the petitioner be enlarged on bail subject to
appropriate conditions being imposed by the trial court and the
petitioner diligently adhering to such conditions, as also not being
required in any other case. For the purpose of imposition of such
conditions and issue of release order the petitioner shall be produced
forthwith before the trial court. The petition is disposed of, in the
above terms.
10. Pending application, if any, shall stand disposed of.
………………...…………………….J.
(A.S. BOPANNA)
..………………….…………………J.
(PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA)
New Delhi,
September 06, 2023
SLP(Crl.) No. 7561/2023
7
(NON-REPORTABLE ORDER)
ITEM NO.1501 COURT NO.7 SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 7561/2023
(Arising out of impugned final judgment & order dated 5/21-03-2023
in BA No. 13289/2022 passed by the High Court Of Jharkhand At
Ranchi)
BACHHU YADAV Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT GOVERNMENT OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR(PMLA) & ANR.Respondent(s)
(IA No. 118882/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 06-09-2023 These matters were called on for pronouncement of
non-reportable Order today.
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Basant R. Sr. Adv.
Mr. Prem Prakash, AOR
Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Abhijit Bhatnagar, Adv.
Ms. Aishvarya, Adv.
Ms. Deepali Nanda, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. S.V. Raju, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR
Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Adv.
Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv.
Mr. Rajat Nair, Adv.
Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Madhusmita Bora, AOR
Mr. Dipankar Singh, Adv.
Mrs. Anupama Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Amar Jyoti Sharma, Adv.
SLP(Crl.) No. 7561/2023
8
Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna pronounced the non-
reportable ORDER of the Bench comprising His Lordship and
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra.
The operative part of the order reads as hereunder;
“We direct that the petitioner be enlarged on
bail subject to appropriate conditions being
imposed by the trial court and the petitioner
diligently adhering to such conditions, as also
not being required in any other case. For the
purpose of imposition of such conditions and
issue of release order the petitioner shall be
produced forthwith before the trial court.”
The petition is disposed of in terms of the signed
order. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(NISHA KHULBEY) (DIPTI KHURANA)
SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed non-reportable order is placed on the file)
SLP(Crl.) No. 7561/2023