In a recent judgement, the Delhi High Court refused to grant bail to the director of Shakti Bhog in a Money laundering case.
Tarun Kumar, the applicant has been charged under section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under section 120B r/w 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian penal code (IPC), 1860 and is in custody since 22.06.2022. The applicant is alleged to have been involved in the offence of money laundering.
The allegations against the applicant are that the applicant aided in a fraudulent increase of inventory/stock in the account books of M/s Shakti Bhog Foods Limited [SBFL] which helped in increasing the borrowings.
The SBFL was engaged in manufacturing and selling food items like wheat flour, rice, biscuits, cookies, Dalia, gram flour, maida etc. under the established and well-known brand name of „Shakti Bhog.‟The company was managed through its Directors / Guarantors – Sh. Kewal Krishan Kumar, Sh. Siddharth Kumar and Smt. Sunanda Kumar. SBFL had around 250 regular employees. It is stated that the applicant was one such employee and was drawing remuneration as an employee.
An Investigation revealed that bank fraud was committed by the active involvement of the Managing Directors, Directors and Guarantors of SBFL.
Mr Kewal Krishan Kumar, and its directors/guarantors – Mr Siddharth Kumar and Mrs Sunanda Kumar and unknown public servants, and other unknown persons for commission of offences u/s 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 and u/s 120B r/w 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, 1860
During the course of the investigation the consortium of banks led by the State Bank of India [SBI] vide Letter of Engagement dated 18.05.2018 engaged the services of a Forensic Auditor – BDO India LLP for conducting Forensic Audit of SBFL. The Forensic Auditor conducted an audit review for the period w.e.f. 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2017 and submitted the report on 25.06.2019.
it was alleged that due to the fraudulent activities, SBFL failed to discharge its loan liability and caused a loss to the consortium member banks to the tune of INR 3269.42 Crore.
During the course of the independent investigation conducted by the Respondent under PMLA, the records/documents about the instant case were called from various agencies, viz. CBI, Banks, Forensic auditors, Stock auditors, Income Tax departments, Sub Registrars Offices.
It was found that the Applicant was not merely an employee of the company who was bound by the decisions taken by Sh. Kewal Krishna Kumar. The defence of the Applicant that the applicant had no such knowledge of any illegal transactions by Sh. Kewal Krishna Kumar and his family members do not seem probable.
There was sufficient incriminating evidence about the involvement of the accused/applicant in the offence of money laundering. Not only do the statements u/s 50 PMLA show the involvement of the applicant but other material such as emails as well as documents containing the signatures of the applicant which are also indicative of the involvement of the applicant in the offence of money laundering.
Justice Jasmeet Singh held that “In the light of these documents and material facts I cannot hold that the applicant is not guilty of the offence of money laundering.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
