Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Chandrama Prasad Singh Vs State of Bihar (Patna High Court)
Appeal Number : Criminal Miscellaneous No. 20273 of 2023
Date of Judgement/Order : 01/08/2023
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Chandrama Prasad Singh Vs State of Bihar (Patna High Court)

Patna High Court held that as Petitioner failed to furnish satisfactory explanation regarding huge fixed assets and cash available with him, bail application of the Petitioner is rejected.

Facts- The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Special (Trial) in which cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable u/s. 3, 4, 44 and 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

It is alleged that accused persons including the petitioner have acquired assets by commission of schedule offences and have invested the proceeds of crime in acquiring huge immovable properties and also unaccounted money deposited with banks. It is alleged thereof that the proceeds of crime were utilized for acquisition of movable/immovable properties in name of petitioner and also in the name of his family members, where the value of immovable properties was more than Rs. 3,99,33,000. The allegation further suggested that six bank accounts were found in name of petitioner and his family members along with two vehicles and LIC policies. The total value of movable & immovable properties comes to approximately about Rs. 4,04,29,415/-, which has been provisionally attached by the Authorized Officer.

Conclusion- Held that Petitioner is accused in 8 criminal cases which appears “schedule offence” in terms of the Act, proceeds of which prima facie appears to create huge property and cash. Further, Petitioner fails to furnish prima facie satisfactory explanation regarding huge fixed assets and cash available with him, while recording his statement under section 50(3) of the Act, where it appears to investigating agency that petitioner is not co-operating during investigation, where investigation regarding remaining proceeds of crime above Rs.4,04,29,415.29/- is still going on. Therefore, this Court at this stage has no reasonable grounds for believing that petitioner is not guilty of offence and he is not likely to commit offence while on bail.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

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

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031