Ashish Kumar v. Directorate of Enforcement

1. In Bail Application No.370/2018 petitioner seeks bail in case FIR No.205/2016 under Sections 420/406/409/468/471/188/120B and Section BAIL APPLN.370/2018 page[1] of[5] 2018:DHC:8231 11, 12 and 13 ofthe Prevention of Corruption Act registered at PS Crime Branch. In Bail Application No.798/2018,petitioner seeks bail in case FIR N0.BCIR/I8/DZ-II/2OI[6] under Sections 3 & 4 ofthe Prevention of Money Laundering Act (hereinafter referred to as PMLA) recorded by the Enforcement Directorate. In the FIR registered by the Crime Branch, petitioner was arrested on 28 March,2017 whereas in the ECIR recorded by the Directorate ofEnforcement under Sections 3 & 4 ofthe PMLA,the petitioner was arrested on 27'^December,2016 and is in custody since then.

2. The allegations in FIR No.205/2016 registered by the Crime Branch against the petitioner are that while investigating FIR No.242/2016 registered atPS C.R.Park involving one Raj Kumar Goel and his associates who were earning profits by routing money into various accounts opened in different bank branches by using forged documents and thereby receiving commission, it was revealed that after the Government ofIndia announced tb demonetization of cun'ency notes of^1,000/- and ?500/- on 8 November, 2016,RajKumar Goel in conspiracy with the present petitioner who wasthe then Manager in Kotak Mahindra Bank posted in Connaught Place Branch, Ambadeep Building and in association with other accused including the Chartered Accountant and the staffofRohit Tandon deposited huge amounts ofcash in the various companies/firms ofRajKumar Goel and his associates at a non-home branch i.e. ConnaughtPlace Branch ofKotak Mahindra Bank although the firms/companies were having their accounts at Naya Bazar Branch. Pursuant to the deposit ofthe cash, demand drafts were issued in different names. BAIL APPLN.370/2018 page2of[5]

3. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that Raj Kumar Goel was engaged in converting old demonetized black money into new currency on commission basis and the petitioner violating the notification/guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India/Ministry of Finance permitted deposit of huge amounts and issued demand drafts in fictitious names or in names which were non-existent. The various firms in whose accounts, the aniounts were deposited were R.K.Intemational, Swastik Trading, Sapna Trading, Mahalaxmi Industries, Shri Ganesh Enterprises, Delhi Trading Company, Virgo International and Kwality Trading Company. After the cash was deposited,total 68 demand drafts were made til for a sum of?36.65 crores on various dates from 15 November, 2016 to 19^*^ November,2016 all by the Branch where petitioner was working as a Manager. Statements ofvarious officers ofthe Kotak Mahindra Branch at Connaught Place have been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which reveals that the deposits as well as the demand drafts were made at the instance ofthe petitioner.

4. From the investigation carried out, it was revealed that Raj Kumar Goelin conspiracy with the petitioner,the Chartered Accountant and staffof Rohit Tandon besides the other accused deposited the unaccounted demonetised currency notes belonging to one Rohit Tandon charging a commission of35% ofwhich 10% wasto go to the petitioner.

5. During the course ofinvestigation,the demand drafts made in respect of the commission amount of Raj Kumar Goel and other associates have been recovered however the demand drafts prepared in relation to the 10% commission ofthe petitioner have not been recovered. During investigation, BAIL APPLN.370/2018 page3of[5] call detail analysis was also done and it was found that the petitioner was in constant touch with Raj Kumar Goel and Kamal Jain, the Chartered Accountant ofRohit Tandon.

6. After registration FIR No.205/2016 by the Crime Branch, ECIR/18/DZ-II/2016 under Sections 3 and 4 ofthe PMLA was recorded on 26'^ December, 2016 and the petitioner was taken in custody on 27^^ December, 2016. The petitioner has been in custody in ECIR/18/DZ- 11/2016 for a period of now nearly 19 months and charge has not been framed as yet. The petitioner has been in custody in FIR No.205/2016 since 28'*^ March, 2017. By virtue of Section 44 of the PMLA, trial of the predicate offences registered by Crime Branch as noted above and the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA has to be conducted together.

7. Considering the fact that for offence punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA, the minimum sentence prescribed is 3 years and the maximum sentence is 7 years imprisonment and the petitioner has been in custody in thePMLA case for nearly 18 months and for nearly 15 months in FIR No.205/2016,this Court deems it fitto grant bail to the petitioner. It is, therefore,directed thatthe petitioner be released on bail in FIR No.205/2016 and ECIR/18/DZ-11/2016 on the following conditions

(i) he will furnish a personal bond in the sum of^5 lakhs each in the two cases with one surety bond each ofthe like amount in the two cases subject to the satisfaction ofthe learned Trial Court;

(li) the petitioner will not leave the country without the prior permission ofthe learned Trial Courtduring the pendency ofthe trial; BAIL APPLN.370/2018 page4of[5]

(iii) passport of the petitioner will be deposited with the learned Trial

(iv) petitioner will notinfluence the witnesses;

(v) as some ofthe material witnesses are employees ofKotak Mahindra

Bank, petitioner will not visit Kotak Mahindra Bank, Coiinaught Place Branch,Ambadeep Building during the course oftrial.

8. Petitions are disposed of

9. Order dasti.