Delhi High Court: An application was filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”) and/or Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code (“CrPC”) read with Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA”) seeking grant of regular bail in case dated 22-04-2024 registered under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA, arising out of FIR dated 12-03-2024 registered at Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 274, 275, 276, 420, 468, 471 read with 120-B and 34 of Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”). Chandra Dhari Singh, J., declined to release the applicant on bail as the complexity of the financial trail and its potential societal and national ramifications require continued custodial interrogation
An FIR was registered under Sections 274, 275, 276, 420, 468, 471 read with 120-B of the IPC, based on a complaint alleging the involvement of several accused persons in the procurement, manufacturing and sale of spurious anti-cancer medicines. In the said FIR, it has been alleged that the primary accused in collusion with their several associates, were engaged in the illegal procurement of empty vials and raw materials of anticancer drugs such as Keytruda and Opdyta. These counterfeit drugs were allegedly manufactured and distributed in the market to unsuspecting cancer patients. Pursuant to the information received, the police conducted simultaneous raids, and the accused persons were allegedly caught in the act of filling empty vials with unauthorized substances and packaging them using specialized machinery. The police seized a substantial quantity of raw materials, counterfeit vials, packaging equipment etc.
The applicant was allegedly in contact with the primary accused since the year 2020 and is accused of purchasing spurious anti-cancer injections from the co-accused without proper billing and documentation. It is further alleged that the applicant knowingly facilitated the sale of these counterfeit drugs, generating proceeds of crime amounting to Rs. 7,45,000/- which were allegedly deposited in various bank accounts. Based on the FIR, the Directorate of Enforcement initiated ECIR, and the applicant was arrested by the ED and remanded in custody. In the meanwhile, the applicant applied for interim bail before the Special Judge citing the ailing health of his father, however, the said interim bail application was rejected. Subsequently, the applicant applied for interim bail before this Court which was granted on 12-09-2024. Following the same, the Special Judge took cognizance of the ECIR vide order and filed a regular bail application before the Special Judge which dismissed vide order dated 15-10-2024. Hence, the present bail application was filed.
On the aspect whether the applicant’s arrest was carried out in adherence to the statutory requirements under Section 19 of the PMLA which mandates that the authorized officer must have ‘reason to believe’ based on material evidence before arresting an individual accused of money laundering, the Court noted that it is evident from the bare reading of the role assigned to the applicant, that the generated proceeds of crime were allegedly transferred to the accounts of the associates and their family members and the applicant played a significant role. This shows the role of the applicant in money laundering and distribution of the illicit gains, and thus, the offence under the PMLA is prima facie committed. The financial records indicate substantial money transfers among the applicant herein and the co-accused’s accounts as well as other known associates involved in the counterfeit medicine syndicate. These transactions, along with the applicant’s control over the business operations, substantiate the claim that he was engaged in money laundering activities. Thus, the investigating authority followed due process and substantiated the ‘reason to believe’ with concrete evidence rather than mere suspicion. Accordingly, the challenge to the legality of the arrest is without merit, and no relief is warranted to the applicant on this ground.
On the aspect that the statements made by co-accused under Section 50 of the PMLA form the sole basis for the applicant’s arrest whether the statements are admissible as evidence and to what extent they can be relied upon to justify the applicant’s arrest and continued detention, the Court observed that statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA are admissible in evidence and can be relied upon to establish culpability in money laundering cases.
Regarding the petitioner’s claim that his alleged proceeds of crime were below Rs. 1 crore and thus exempt from Section 45’s stringent conditions, the Court stated that the totality of the money laundering scheme must be considered and given the systematic nature of the fraudulent scheme and the petitioner’s active role, the Court found that he was liable under the PMLA irrespective of the individual amount attributed to him.
The Court concluded that the accused failed to fall under the proviso to Section 45 of the PMLA and satisfy the twin conditions under Section 45(1) of the PMLA and failed to meet the general considerations under the triple test for the grant of bail. Consequently, the applicant’s custody is warranted to ensure the integrity of the investigation and prevent any potential misuse of the judicial process.
Thus, the Court declined the prayer for bail as respondent has presented sufficient material to warrant further investigation, including financial records, electronic evidence, and statements of co-accused implicating the applicant.
[Lovee Narula v ED, Bail Appln. 3808/2024, decided on 28-01-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Siddharth Agarwal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Piyush Sanghi, Mr. Rohan Wadhwa, Ms. Khushbu Sahu, Mr. Nikhil Singh, Ms. Priyadarshi Gopal, Ms. Anushka Ojha, Ms. Raahithya Raj. Mishra, Ms. Arshiya Ghose and Mr. Ashish Raghuvanshi, Advocates for petitioner
Mr. Arkaj Kumar, SC with Ms. Vaishnavi Bhargava, Mr. Aakash Mishra and Mr. Ishank Jha, Advocates for respondents
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
