In a recent ruling, the Calcutta High Court held that statements made by co-accused under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) cannot be treated as substantive evidence and such statements must be tested during the trial and cannot form the sole basis for denying bail at the preliminary stage.
Sujay Krishna Bhadra, the petitioner was accused in a money laundering case based on statements made by co-accused under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The co-accused, Tapas Kumar Mondal and Kuntal Ghosh, claimed that the petitioner was involved in a scheme related to manipulating the selection of teachers and handling large sums of money.
The Future of Tax and Finance: Upskill with Us
The petitioner was not named in the original FIR, charge sheet, or supplementary charge sheets related to the predicate offense. The petitioner had been in custody for over a year and a half, with no trial yet in sight. Charges were not framed, and evidence relied on by the ED included statements, financial records, and voice recordings.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) claimed there was evidence, including financial records and voice recordings, linking the petitioner to the crime. The petitioner denied these claims stating they lacked concrete proof.
A single bench led by Justice Suvra Ghosh while hearing the bail application from the petitioner observed that such statements from the co-accused are not strong enough evidence on their own and such statements must be tested during the trial, not at the stage of deciding bail.
The Future of Tax and Finance: Upskill with Us
The court referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling in A. Tajudeen v. Union of India (2015) which clearly stated that an accused person’s statement alone cannot be the only basis to prove someone guilty.
The court explained that these allegations must be supported by other evidence during the trial and cannot be the only basis for keeping the petitioner in jail. Considering the petitioner’s long time in jail without trial and no further need for custody. The court granted him bail.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
