Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

A Delhi Court has recently denied bail to a man in a money laundering case related to an alleged bank loan fraud. Court said that such "unscrupulous shenanigans" erode public trust and weaken the foundations of the economy.

While dismissing accused Bharat Rana Chaudhary's bail application, Special Judge Neelofer Abida Perveen of the Rouse Avenue Court termed the modus operandi used by him "sinister", and said he was "prima facie" tampering with evidence and creating false evidence.

“The allegations are exceedingly serious, the offence grave, not merely from the standpoint of the large volume of POC involved, the modus operandi was so elaborate and sinister that accused/applicant adopting such devious designs succeeded in duping the bank multiple times siphoning of huge amounts of public money in the process, layering and re-routing the same to himself and gratifying other unsavory elements and operations in the process”, the court said.

The ED claimed that Chaudhary caused a loss of around Rs 30 crore to Punjab National Bank due to credit repayment default during 2010 to 2012.

The judge said that there is no material placed to record a prima facie satisfaction in favour of the accused that the accused is not guilty of money laundering. "It is indeed such unscrupulous shenanigans that erode public trust and weaken the foundations of the economy, and warrant for economic offences to be treated as a separate class unto itself," she said.

Noting that the accused had failed to join investigation despite being summoned on numerous occasions, the court opined that the accused was shown to have been non-cooperative all along.

“Also, the search at his premises lead to seizure of documents indicating that these were in the process of being fabricated. The end user of the POC, a substantial part is yet untraced, the possibility does not sound too baseless and farfetched of the accused tampering with evidence to evade the discovery of end user of POC that remains to be unearthed. That the accused is not likely to commit similar offence also is not satisfied in favour of the accused”, the court noted.

Chaudhary sought bail on the ground that the case was registered in 2015 and he was arrested by the ED on February 14, 2023. He claimed that no purpose will be served by keeping him further in custody, as the chargesheet had already been filed in the case.

On the contrary, the ED opposed the bail application and argued that the arrest was made to prevent tampering of evidence, influencing witnesses and the derailment of money laundering investigations. The counsel also argued that there was enough evidence suggesting that he was tampering with the evidence and creating false evidence to justify the transactions in his firm's account.

It was ED’s case that Chaudhary, with the help of others, took a loan from Punjab National Bank on the basis of false, forged and fabricated valuable securities, fake identity documents, forged rental deeds, forged collateral security papers, fake audited balance sheets and other documents.

On the basis of forged and fabricated documents, Chaudhary took a “Cash Credit Facility” in the name of different firms namely M/s Surya Impex, M/s Jupiter Trading and M/s Four Season Agro Products Ltd/ Four Seasons Sortex Pvt. Ltd., during the period 2010 to 2011, and by way of “fraudulent means” he “siphoned off the loan funds” and never utilized the same in the business activity of these firms.

Conclusively, the Special judge ordered, “This application for grant of bail is therefore bound to fail on the touchstone of the twin conditions prescribed under section 45 PMLA, and stands dismissed accordingly”.

Case Title: ED v. Bharat Rana Chaudhary