Allahabad High Court
Abid Ali vs Assistant Dir. Directorate ... on 26 April, 2023
Bench: Subhash Vidyarthi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 987 of 2023
Applicant :- Abid Ali
Opposite Party :- Assistant Dir. Directorate Enforcement Govt. Of India Near Jagram Crossing Distt. Allahabad
Counsel for Applicant :- Malik Faiyaz Ahmed,Komal Prasad Tiwari,Pushkal Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Rohit Tripathi
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Brijendra Prakash Tripathi holding brief of Sri Komal Prasad Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rohit Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent/Directorate of Enforcement and perused the record.
2. This Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant after rejection of his anticipatory bail application by the order dated 10.04.2023, passed by learned Special Judge (P.C. Act) C.B.I. Court No.3, Lucknow in Anticipatory Bail Application No.2909 of 2023, seeking Anticipatory Bail in connection with Complaint Case No.41 of 2015 in ECIR/08/VSI/2011/AD(NKD), Sessions Case No.125 of 2023, under Section 3/4 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Police Station Directorate of Enforcement, District Prayagraj.
3. In paragraphs no.9 and 10 of the affidavit filed in support of the application, it has been stated that the applicant has been convicted for commission of offence bearing Case Crime No.557 of 2008, under Sections 489-B, 489-C and 120-B of I.P.C. in Sessions Trial No.49 of 2009 and he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for six years. The applicant has also been convicted in another case bearing Case Crime No.1 of 2010, relating to RC No.09(E)/2008, under Sections 120-B, 489-B, 489-C I.P.C. Police Station C.B.I./EQUIV, New Delhi. The copies of the judgments and orders of conviction have not been annexed by the applicant with the application.
4. The Enforcement Directorate has filed the present complaint against four persons including the applicant stating that the applicant was convicted in the aforesaid cases and it has emerged that fund of Rs.5,33,000/- has been utilized in purchase of movable and immovable properties by the applicant and Rs.3,82,800/- were credited in cash in his bank account during the relevant period and the applicant could not provide any explanation in support of any legitimate source of the aforesaid funds.
5. As the applicant already stands convicted in two criminal cases for the reason that counterfeit Indian currency notes of face value of Rs.5,50,000/- were recovered from him, and the complaint alleges that he has amassed assets during the relevant period and he could not disclose the source of funds of those assets, the aforesaid facts do not warrant exercise of discretion of the court in favour of the applicant, who already stands convicted for the predicate offence. Therefore, without making any further observation, which may affect the merits of the case, this court is not inclined to grant indulgence in the present case.
6. The anticipatory bail application is accordingly rejected.
.
(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)
Order Date :- 26.4.2023
Ram.
