Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Corporate Law

Bail of accused involved in drug trafficking & money laundering rejected by HC

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2025 taxguru.in 517
Case Name
Banmeet Singh Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Uttarakhand High Court)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement


Banmeet Singh Vs Directorate of Enforcement (Uttarakhand High Court)

Uttarakhand High Court held that bail of accused involved in drug trafficking and money laundering matter deserved to be rejected since various questions fall for deeper scrutiny during trial. Hence, bail rejected.

Facts- The applicant was investigated with regard to the offences of drug trafficking and money laundering in the United States of America. He was arrested in the month of April, 2019, in the United Kingdom on extradition request of the US authorities on drug trafficking and money laundering charges. The applicant entered into a plea agreement with the US authorities on 05.01.2024. He was convicted, but his sentence was reduced to 60 months. On 19.04.2024, the applicant was released. On his arrival in India, he was interrogated and finally arrested.

Conclusion- Held that the applicant had entered into a plea agreement in the United States. The BTC were surrendered and the applicant received the reduced sentence. The money was transmitted in the Indian accounts during that period only. In the request for assistance sought by the United States Department of Justice, the United States authorities have informed the Indian authorities that during investigation, the US authorities identified several Pay Pal, Money Gram and Western Union accounts (Collectively, the funnel accounts) used by the Singh DTO to receive proceeds on drug trafficking. The money was transferred accordingly in the India accounts. It is also true that under Section 60 (2) of the Act, such account have not been freezed. What is it’s effect? How these accounts are directly connected with the applicant? Whether the presumption under Section 23 may be extended to conclude that money which has been transferred from outside India into the Indian accounts by the applicant are proceeds of crime? These all questions would fall for deeper scrutiny during trial. Thus, held that there is no ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be rejected.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.