logo
 
     
   
 

Professional Updates > Criminal Laws

Professional Update
Category: Criminal Laws, Posted on: 06/10/2024 , Posted By: CA SHIKHAR GARG
Visitor Count:29

Professional Update

(Criminal Case laws)

Bail Appeal no.  1663/2024 (Delhi High Court)

Sehegal Hossain.

vs

Directorate of Enforcement.

Ratio.

Hon’ble Delhi court held that right of liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is a sacrosanct right which needs to be accepted even in cases where stringent provisions are incorporated through special laws. It was held that prolonged incarceration before being pronounced guilty of an offence, should not be permitted to become punishment without trial.

Facts.

The applicant filed a bail application under section 439 of the CrPC read with section 45 of the PMLA, 2002. The applicant has been arrested based on the illegal smuggling of cattle from India to Bangladesh from 19.12.2015 to 22.04.2017. The bribery has been paid to the BSF force and the CBI alleged that 2,000 Rs. has been paid to per cattle and 500 Rs. per cattle has been paid to the custom officials. The applicant has been arrested since 09.06.2022 by CBI, Kolkata. The applicant has been granted bail in the CBI case by this hon’ble court.

Issue.

Whether the accused is entitled to bail u/s 45 of the PMLA.

Findings.

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that right of the personal liberty under article 21 is sacrosanct.

The allegations against the Applicant are essentially are in the nature of facilitating the offence of illegal cattle smuggling by providing authoritative support and consequent clout that he exercised on account of his being in the Police and being connected with an influential Political leader, the co-accused Mr. Anubrata Mondal. He helped in procuring stray cattle from various markets, collecting cash on behalf of co-accused, Mr. Anubrata Mondal, and laundering the PoC. The Applicant is an accused in the predicate offence as well, though admitted to bail in the said offence by this Court.

Though the investigations qua the Petitioner are complete and the Supplementary Complaint has been filed in the Court, but the trial has not been proceeding since last 2 years.

Looking at his antecedents, he is not a flight risk, and he has deep roots in the Society, having been in the employment of the Govt. The evidence being essentially documentary, is not likely to be tampered or the witnesses influenced. 

Applicant has been in judicial custody from 09.06.2022, in the scheduled offence, and from 07.10.2022, in the present case, i.e. for over two years. The documents involved in the present case are voluminous and the trial may take a long time to get concluded as was observed in Anubrata Mondal (Supra), while granting the Bail to the co-accused. 

Considering the above situation, the Applicant is admitted to bail.

(Disclaimer: The information provided by the author in the article is for general informational purposes only. All information provided is in the good faith, however we make no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability or completeness of any information in the article.)

CA Manoj Garg

9811275735


To Activate comments you need to provide details for google authentication and facebook authentication
 
     
39681 Times Visited