CONTRADICTORY ACTIONS IN MONEY LAUNDERING CASE: DELHI COURT CRITICIZES ED
Category: Criminal Law
「 ✦ Content ✦ 」
The Delhi court granted bail to the accused,and they emphasized the contradictory in the ED’s action.
KEY ASPECTS
Hearing based on applications,filed by both the paties: A bail application has been filled by Mr.Mangelal Sunil Agarwal who was accused for money laundering case and the amount was 18.9 crore.And the ED has also filed a prosecution application in October 2022 where they mentioned eight names of the accused.The hearing was conducted on basis of these two applications.
Consideration of the Court: The Court has mentioned that while Investigating Officer has the right to arrest or not arrest an individual, this right or power cannot be exercised arbitrarily. When the evidence available to both the IO and the court is identical, and the court has refrained from summoning the individual as an accused, the IO’s decision to arrest him on the same evidence is an apparent overreach of his powers, which must be disapproved.
Direction of the Court to ED: The court directed the ED director to inform the court if there is any standard operating procedure (SOP) or regulation governing arrests and what processes are in place for senior officials to monitor the arrest of an accused. It also ordered an inquiry to determine why the two IOs took diametrically opposite approaches based on the same evidence.
Court requested an inquiry report: The court requested an inquiry report within a month to identify whether either officer had failed in their duties and what actions would be taken against the responsible party. If both opposing views are found justifiable, the court asked for clarification on how to reconcile the situation.
Implementation Section 45 of the PMLA: the court granted bail to Agarwal, noting that there was no evidence on record to show that the applicant had the intent (mens rea) when dealing with the alleged proceeds of crime. It Court also stated that he had no previous criminal record. For these reason , there is no such grounds to believe that he is likely to commit any offense while on bail. Therefore, the accused has successfully met the strict conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA.
CONCLUSION
The main aim of any investigation is that it should not be impartial and should not be biased. However when an IO give the permission for personal opinions to influence their work, it can constitute a unfair outcomes. In this case two IOs provided same evidence but one decided to call the as a witness and other decided to arrest them. And this state that how subjective opinion can affect the outcome of any investigation and interfere in someone's freedom.
OLQ is a Pan-India basis law firm connecting legal expertise nationwide.
WRITTEN BY: KOUSTAV GHOSH
GUIDED BY: ADVOCATE ANIK
