The Delhi High Court granted interim bail to Sameer Mahandru under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 in the Delhi Excise Policy Case .
The present application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Sections 45 and 65 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 has been filed by the applicant/petitioner seeking interim bail for the petitioner in relation to case registered under Sections 3 and 4 of the PMLA.
The petitioner formed a Partnership Firm “Indo Spirits” with Arun Ramachandran Pillai and Prem Rahul Manduri for the wholesale L-l license under the Delhi Excise Policy, 2021-22.
Subsequently, CBI registered FIR under Sections 120B and 477A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 on the complaint of the Lt. Governor, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) against the petitioner and other accused persons regarding irregularities committed in the framing and implementation of the excise policy of the GNCTD for the year 2021-22.
The role ascribed to the petitioner in the Prosecution Complaint is that there are advance kickbacks of around Rs. 100 crores that were paid to the public servants in this conspiracy between the political persons, and Government officers/officials causing a total loss of Rs. 2873 cores to the exchequer of GNCTD and the petitioner along with other accused have key roles in the commission of the offence of money laundering.
Vikas Pahwa, senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner drew the attention of the Court to the ailments suffered by the petitioner by submitting a comprehensive medical note. It is further submitted that the petitioner is under constant consultation and treatment of specialists and is suffering from debilitating pain and serious medical conditions, most of which, if not attended to and treated properly under regular monitoring, will cause irreversible damage.
Further, the petitioner must have continuity in treatment and he needs to be in constant supervision and care of his family members and requires an attendant in case he is sent back to custody, it would not be possible for him to continue with the treatment and providing with the level of care, and supervision he requires.
A Vacation Bench of the Delhi High Court of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh observed that “in view of the health conditions of the petitioner, the medical records being furnished on behalf of the petitioner and the same being verified by the ED as authentic, the non-denial of the condition of the petitioner which is worse than the co-accused who has been granted regular bail, and on the perusal of all other precedents this Court finds that the petitioner is suffering from life-threatening diseases warranting immediate medical attention and post-operative care. This Court is of the opinion in view of the aforesaid discussion, the petitioner’s case satisfies the test of the proviso to Section 45(1) of the PMLA.”
“In view of the entirety of the matter, the petitioner is admitted to interim bail for a period of six weeks on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) with two sureties” the Court concluded.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
