[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Sourav Bardhan vs The Union Of India Through Directorate ... on 20 December, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
2025:JHHC:38378
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 939 of 2025
------
Sourav Bardhan, aged about 46 years, Son of Bhupati Ranjan Bardhan,
Resident of Block 50/10B, Tapovoan Housing Complex, Bamunnara, P.O.
+ P.S. and District-Durgapur, West Bengal, at present resident of Block B2,
Flat No. 18, Panchvati Complex, Opposite VIP Haldiram, P.O. + P.S. -
Baguiati, District-Kolkata, West Bengal.
... Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India through Directorate of Enforcement, represented by
Assistant Director (PMLA), Kolkata Zonal Office-1, CGO Complex at 3rd
MSC Building, 6th Floor, P.S. +P.S.- Salt Late, District-Kolkata-700064, West
Bengal.
... Opp. Party
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Prabhas Chandra Jha, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate
: Mr. Manmohit Bhalla, Advocate
------
05/Dated: 20th December, 2025
1. Reference may be made to the order dated 17th December, 2025 by
which the following order was passed:
"1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
after going through the statement made at paragraph-3
justifying the ground of not producing himself in the
Court in order to furnish bail bonds in terms of the order
dated 07.02.2025 passed in A.B.A. No. 7840 of 2024 which
has been sought to be modified, has found that the ground
has been taken that on 03.03.2025 the petitioner
appeared but the bail bonds has not been accepted, but,
no such application has been appended thereto.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought for
adjournment for today praying to post this matter on
20.12.2025 so that appropriate affidavit be filed.
2025:JHHC:38378
3. Considering the prayer, let this matter be listed on
20.12.2025 at 02:15 p.m."
2. A supplementary affidavit in terms of the aforesaid order has been
filed stating therein, particularly at paragraph 2 that the statement
made at paragraph 5 of the main petition may permitted to be
withdrawn.
3. Accordingly, the paragraph 5 of the main petition stands deleted.
4. The ground has been made out, as has been stated in paragraph 5 of
the supplementary affidavit, that by the time the petitioner has
approached to the learned court below to surrender and to accept his
bail bonds, the time which was granted by this Court for surrender
that is of two weeks, had already expired.
5. However, immediately after knowing this fact, he has filed the
instant petition for extension of time.
6. It appears that order dated 07.02.2025 has been sought to be
modified on the ground that by the time, the petitioner has got
information to surrender, but by that time, two weeks' time as was
directed to surrender vide order dated 07.02.2025 for the purpose of
accepting the bail-bond in terms of the judgment passed by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Tarsem Lal V. Directorate of
Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office reported in (2024) 7 SCC 61,
has lapsed and he could not appear, therefore, the present petition
has been filed for modification of the order dated 07.02.2025.
2025:JHHC:38378
7. Admittedly, in the order dated 7th February, 2025, the petitioner was
directed to surrender within a period of two weeks' from the date of
receipt of the copy of the order and the court concerned was directed
to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.
8. The ground has been taken that the petitioner could not be able to
surrender within the time, as he was not aware about time-frame
stipulated in order 7th February, 2025 passed by this Court.
9. Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for the ED, has
submitted that due to non-appearance of the petitioner, the trial is at
hold and as such, for securing his appearance in the ends of justice,
an appropriate order may be passed, so that the law as has been
referred in the case of Tarsem Lal V. Directorate of Enforcement
Jalandhar Zonal Office (supra) be taken into consideration as has
been referred in the order dated 7th February, 2025 in A.B.A. No. 7840
of 2024.
10. He has further submitted that since the trial has already been kept
at hold which is evident from the conduct of the petitioner since he
has taken no endeavour to surrender before the Court in pursuance
to the order dated 07.02.2025 within stipulated period of time, as
granted by this court.
11. Furthermore, the instant petition has been filed on 10.03.2025 but no
endeavour has been taken for the early hearing of the instant
petition.
2025:JHHC:38378
12. However, this Court considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of Tarsem Lal V. Directorate of Enforcement
Jalandhar Zonal Office (supra) which have been taken into
consideration by this Court while passing the order on 7th February,
2025 and as such, is of the view that one opportunity is to be given to
the petitioner to surrender for the purpose of passing appropriate
order.
13. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender on 22nd
December, 2025, by filing appropriate application for consideration
of the same as has been observed in the order dated 07.02.2025.
14. The order dated 07.02.2025 is modified to the extent as indicated
referred hereinabove.
15. It needs to refer herein taking into consideration the conduct of the
petitioner that if the petitioner failed to surrender, then the learned
Court will proceed by taking all possible measure for securing his
appearance.
16. Accordingly, the instant criminal miscellaneous being Cr.M.P. No. 939
of 2025 stands disposed of with aforesaid observation.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
20th December, 2025
Samarth
Uploaded on 20.12.2025
