Madhya Pradesh High Court
Harishankar Gurjar vs Enforcement Directorate on 8 May, 2023
Author: Sanjeev S Kalgaonkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
CRA No. 6219 of 2023
(HARISHANKAR GURJAR AND OTHERS Vs ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE)
Dated : 08-05-2023
Shri Anil Khare - Senior Advocate - with Shri Priyank Agrawal -
Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Vikram Singh - Advocate for the respondent.
Heard on admission.
Appeal is admitted for hearing.
Heard on I.A. No.10123/2023, which is an application for staying the
order of confiscation proceedings.
Learned counsel for the respondent has requested for grant of four
weeks time to file reply to the said application.
Request granted.
The office is directed to reflect the name of Shri Vikram Singh as the
counsel appearing for the respondent.
Also heard on I.A No.10104/2023, which is an application under
Section 389 of the Cr.P.C for suspension of sentence and grant of bail to
appellants Harishankar4 Gurjar and Smt. Seema Rurjar arising out of
judgment dated 29/04/2023 delivered in S.C. No.02/2016 by the Seventh
Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal.
The appellants have been convicted under section 3 read with section 4
of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, "the PMLA") and
sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with fine of Rs.5,000/-, with default
stipulations.
According to the prosecution case, a complaint was made by the
Assistant Director for the Enforcement Directorate against the appellants
wherein it was alleged that the Lokayukt Police has registered an FIR dated
14.7.2009 against the appellants for possessing assets disproportionate to their
known sources of income.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellants are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. The trial Court has
not properly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence available on
record. Considering the inconsistencies and discrepancies in the
prosecution evidence, the judgment of trial court is not sustainable. Final
disposal of instant appeal would take considerable time. Hence, prayer has
been made to suspend the jail sentence of the appellants. The appellants are
aged 67 years and 56 years respectively. They were on bail during trial.
Learned Panel Lawyer opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available
on record.
Considering the aforesaid factual backdrop and without expressing any
conclusive opinion on merits, this Court deems it proper to suspend the
remaining jail sentence of the appellant .Accordingly, I.A No. 10104/2023 is
allowed.
Subject to depositing the fine amount (if not already deposited), the
remaining jail sentence of the appellants is hereby suspended and it is directed
that the appellants be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond for a
sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with one solvent
surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with a further
direction to appear before the trial Court, Bhopal, on 12 th July, 2023 and
also on such other dates as may be fixed by the trial Court in this regard during
the pendency of this appeal.
Record of the trial court be requisitioned.
List this case for final hearing in the first week after summer vacation.
Certified copy as per rules.
SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR)
JUDGE
ps
PRASHANT SHRIVASTAVA
2023.05.08 16:02:11 +05'30'
