Read Time: 05 minutes
Ahmed A.R.Buhari, an NRI was arrested in March 2022 for cheating Rs 5,64.48 Crores by supplying sub-standard coal to Public Sector Undertaking. Allegedly, the proceeds of crime were diverted to various entities across the border.
Upon the complaint by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) raising concerns regarding the bail granted to an accused involved in a Rs 564.48 crore coal scam, the Madras High Court on Thursday directed its Registrar (Vigilance) to immediately seize the case records from the special court for money laundering cases.
The bench of Justice G. Jayachandran passed the orders when the counsel for ED, Special Public Prosecutor N.Ramesh, made a mention before the court in the morning for Lunch Motion stating that the Presiding Officer of the Special Court had ignored the reopen and clarification petition filed by the prosecution and pronounced order granting bail in a haste.
SPP further claimed that when he attempted to get a copy of the bail order, he was informed that the bail order copy was not ready.
Therefore, apprehending that the accused may furnish sureties and flee away from the clutches of law, he sought immediate intervention of the high court and prayed for direction to set aside the trial court's order.
Considering the grave allegation, the high court immediately requested the Registrar (Vigilance) to collect the case papers from the trial court.
Upon perusal of the impugned bail order, court noted, "It is obviously seen that there is no discussion in respect of pleadings and the embargo under Section 45 of the PMLA Act, the Act under which the accused now been prosecuted".
Court underscored that despite prosecution's petition to reopen the case for clarification, the trial court had hurriedly passed a non-speaking order granting bail to the accused.
"...case records seized by the Registrar (Vigilance) also do not contain a detailed order except the docket order which is signed by the Presiding Officer which is extracted above for easy reference. In that order, there is no indication that there is a detailed order dictated/pronounced and signed in the Open Court. This clearly indicates that when the docket order was signed by the Presiding Officer, there was no detailed order," highlighted the court.
Taking note of the same, court opined that the impugned bail order had to be tested. Therefore, it stayed the same.
Court directed the Registrar (Vigilance) to return the records while ordering that the copy of the high court's present order be sent to the trial court forthwith through Special Messenger.
Moreover, court issued notice to the respondent parties returnable by August 23, 2023.
Case detail: Crl.O.P.No.19147 of 2023
Please Login or Register
