Tender Scam: Jharkhand HC rejects Bail Plea of Ex-Minister in PMLA Case [Read Order]

The Jharkhand High Court has rejected the bail application filed by the senior politician and sitting MLA in Jharkhand, who is accused in a high-profile money laundering case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA).

Coming to the facts of the case, an FIR was lodged in 2019 by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Jamshedpur, leading to an ECIR (Enforcement Case Information Report) by the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The case evolved after the discovery that massive bribes and commissions were allegedly being collected to award tenders in various government departments. It is alleged that Alamgir Alam, through his private secretary Sanjeev Kumar Lal and associates like Jahangir Alam and Munna Singh, received kickbacks amounting to around Rs. 56 crores.

During raids in May 2024, the ED recovered over Rs. 35 crores in cash from flats linked to these individuals. Based on statements of co-accused, ED alleges that Alamgir Alam received commissions from tender allotments, even after he became a minister on 27.12.2019. The ED has claimed that the process of money laundering continued while Alam was in office and that he directly benefited from and concealed the proceeds of crime.

The MLA’s counsel contended that he was being falsely implicated and pointed out that he was not a minister at the time the original predicate offence occurred. They stressed that he was not named in the original FIR or the ECIR, and no cash was recovered from his residence.

Stay Updated with the Latest Audit Report Formats & Audit Trials Requirements!, Click Here

The counsel also challenged the reliability of statements made by co-accused who were in custody, arguing that such statements lacked probative value. The appellant’s counsel also pleaded for bail on medical grounds and long incarceration, noting that he had cooperated fully with the investigation and was 75 years old.

The high court observed that Alam's role could not be brushed aside merely because he was not a minister at the time of the predicate offence and that his later involvement, along with documentary and testimonial evidence, demonstrated a long-term and active link to criminal proceeds.

The Court also declined to award parity to other co-accused who were granted bail, stating that the MLA maintained a position of public trust and that his alleged involvement rendered his case unique. Medical reasons were also dismissed due to the lack of credible data indicating a life-threatening condition.

The bench held that the twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA, requiring the court to be satisfied that the accused is not guilty and is unlikely to commit an offence while on bail, were not fulfilled in the MLA’s case.

Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad dismissed the bail application and directed that the trial court should proceed with the matter without being influenced by any observations made by the court and decide the case strictly in accordance with the law.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates