Introduction Orissa High Court Case

The Orissa High Court recently granted bail to a blind individual accused under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). The judgment, rendered by Justice Sushanta Kumar Panigrahi involves a comprehensive evaluation of the case, emphasizing the lack of evidence against the accused. This legal analysis delves into the specifics of the case, examining the Orissa High Court interpretation of relevant statutes, conditions for bail under the PMLA, and the considerations that led to the granting of bail.

Background of the Case:

The case revolves around an informant who participated in a Multi-Level Marketing Scheme (MLM Scheme) operated by M/s. Fine Indi Sales Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur (FIPL). The informant deposited Rs. 10,000 in the scheme but did not receive the promised products or vouchers. Upon discovering a similar business in Odisha, the informant made a subsequent deposit of Rs. 40,000, involving around twenty individuals with a total deposit of Rs. 5,00,000. Subsequently, an FIR was lodged against FIPL officials under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and the Prize Chit and Money Circulations Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978.

Legal Framework:

The Orissa High Court referred to Section 45 of the PMLA, which outlines conditions for granting bail to those accused of money laundering. According to this section, bail cannot be granted unless the Public Prosecutor has had an opportunity to oppose the application, and the court is convinced of the accused’s innocence and that they are unlikely to commit further offenses while on bail.

Orissa High Court Analysis:-

1. Absence of Tampering Evidence
The court noted that the charge sheet had been submitted, and documents were seized, reducing the likelihood of tampering with evidence. The accused was also described as cooperative during the investigation, minimizing the risk of misuse of liberty.

2. Personal Background of the Accused
Emphasizing that the accused was a permanent resident with family ties and ancestral property in his locality, the court concluded that there was no risk of absconding if bail were granted.

3. Blindness as a Consideration
Recognizing the accused’s blindness, the court asserted that this condition entitled him to bail under Section 45 of the PMLA.

4. Prima Facie Case Assessment
Citing the precedent in Vijay Agrawal v. Directorate of Enforcement, the court reiterated that it need only consider the prima facie case and is not obligated to determine guilt. The court found no material against the accused, asserting that he had no role in the alleged crime.

5. Online Transaction Records
The court observed that the entire transaction of the company was conducted online, with payments made through banks. Notably, no customers had reported any default by the company before the freezing of its bank account.

Bail Conditions Imposed:-

The court, after careful consideration, granted bail to the accused with specific conditions:

1. The petitioner must appear before the trial court on each scheduled date.
2. The accused must refrain from engaging in any criminal offenses while on bail.
3. Any attempt to tamper with the evidence of prosecution witnesses is strictly prohibited.

The Orissa High Court warned that the violation of any of these conditions would result in the cancellation of bail.

Conclusion:-

The Orissa High Court decision to grant bail to the blind PMLA accused sheds light on the meticulous considerations undertaken by the judiciary. The judgment underscores the importance of evaluating the evidence, balancing the interests of justice, and adhering to the legal framework when deciding on bail applications. It also highlights the Orissa High Court recognition of unique circumstances, such as the accused’s blindness, in the application of legal principles. This case serves as a notable example of how the judiciary aims to strike a delicate balance between the protection of individual rights and the interests of justice.

Must Read:- Rajasthan High Court orders swift passport issuance for minor separated from mother

Facebook