Shree Kumar Singh v. Union Of India , Through The Director, Government Of India
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41122 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2013 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Patna ====================================================== SHREE KUMAR SINGH S/o- Late Ram Tavkal Singh Resident of Masrah, Udvant Nagar, Arrah, District - Bhojpur, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA 2.
Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Government of India, 1st floor, Chandpura Palace, Bank Road, West Gandhi Maidan, Patna -Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanchay Srivastava, Advocate For the UOI :
Mr. Dr. K.N Singh (A.S.G.) Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Retainer (ED) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-12-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within four weeks after complete start of the physical Court. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 45 of the PMLA ECIR No. PTZO/03/2013, Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Co-accused Sanjay Pratap Singh was involved in a criminal act disclosing scheduled offence under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The petitioner had purchased a property through a sale deed along with said Sanjay Pratap Singh. Petitioner claims that he had made payment of his part of consideration money of rupees thirteen lacs through cash. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41122 of 2021(2) dt.15-12-2021 2/2 purchase was made in the year 2011. In the Income Tax Return, the petitioner showed total income of rupees seven lacs in that year. Therefore, evidently, the petitioner had spent disproportionate money to the known source of his income and allegation is that Sanjay Pratap Singh was hiding his tainted money through the petitioner to the knowledge of the petitioner. Considering the nature of allegation of involvement in the economic offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in connection with Special Trial No. (PMLA) 09 of 2020 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Patna/successor Court.
Hence, prayer for anticipatory bail is refused. Petitioner may surrender and pray for regular bail. (Birendra Kumar, J) Kundan/- U T