 | « Back to article | Print this article |
Special court judge M G Deshpande, who has granted bail to Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut, terming his arrest as "illegal, without reason and a witch-hunt", had pulled up the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on multiple occasions this year over its approach in dealing with money laundering cases.
Judge Deshpande, while granting bail to the Rajya Sabha MP on Wednesday, held that the probe agency shows "extraordinary" speed while arresting an accused and seeking custody, but once the accused is remanded in judicial custody, "the pace taken by ED for arresting him automatically gets down to almost zero", the court held.
"I am constrained to note that not a single trial right from the establishment of this designated court, the ED has concluded by leading evidence and the court could not give a single judgment right from the last decade," the judge had said while granting bail to Sanjay Raut and co-accused Pravin Raut.
The court said every time an explanation is sought, the probe agency's response is, "Further investigation is going on in each and every case."
"Even the cases wherein this court has framed charges, could not record evidence for more than one-two pages. In this way, the extraordinary pace with which ED arrests accused becomes not even a snail speed in conducting trials," the judge added.
This was not the first incident where this judge passed an order against the probe agency in the money laundering cases.
Special judge Deshpande was probably the first judge in the country to grant an interim relief to money laundering case accused for want of a scheduled offence in the wake of a Supreme Court order.
In July this year, the Supreme Court, in an order, specified that a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cannot continue if there is no scheduled offence and hence the special court has no jurisdiction to extend the judicial custody of the persons arrested under the Act.
As per the PMLA provisions, a prior FIR (scheduled offence) is a requisite for the ED to initiate action against a person involved with the process or activity.
A week after the apex court's order, Babulal Verma and Kamalkishor Gupta of Omkar group, arrested by the ED, approached the special PMLA court of judge Deshpande, seeking discharge in the money laundering case for want of scheduled offence.
Citing the Supreme Court guidelines, the duo contended the money laundering case doesn't stand against them as they had been discharged in the predicate offence on which the ED case was based.
The judge had immediately granted interim bail to them despite the ED vehemently opposing the court's move.
A lawyer representing the ED told the court that the order would have a far-reaching effect on all the PMLA cases across the country and that the judge must reconsider its decision. However, the judge refused to budge. Later, the duo was discharged from the case.
The court had then said the case squarely falls within the categories prescribed by the Supreme Court.
The special judge was of the view that considering the peculiar facts as now and henceforth, the PMLA case against both accused cannot proceed and it makes detention of both accused "illegal".
Taking a stern view of ED's objection towards the release of the duo, the special judge had said, "This court strongly feels it cannot join hands with vengeful complainant like ED to humiliate accused...By continuing their judicial custody, that too, in utter disregard to the recent law of the land."
The case against the Omkar executives pertains to alleged irregularities in the execution of the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) scheme in development of a housing society in Mumbai.
Last month, the court had discharged actor Sachin Joshi, another accused in the same case, noting that there was nothing to show that Joshi had any knowledge that the company associated with him was dealing with proceeds of crime.
The court had said there was no record of Joshi or his companies receiving the money, and negated allegations that the companies formed by Joshi were fictitious.
"In this background and documents referred along with other nowhere indicates that group of companies of the applicant were only on paper to facilitate layering," the court had said.
Earlier in February, special judge Deshpande had pulled up the central agency for not taking active approach to begin trials in the PMLA cases, while granting bail to Yes Bank founder Rana Kapoor, his wife Bindu, businessman Gautam Thapar and seven others in a case pertaining to the sale of a property at a prime location in Delhi.
"It is a fact that ever since this special court for the PMLA cases has been established not a single such case has been disposed of by judgment. The ED has not shown any active approach to begin the trials of the cases, which have been pending since long," the court had noted in its order related to the case against Rana Kapoor and others.