DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT versus ADITYA TRIPATHI

Citation: [2023] 5 S.C.R. 410 · Decided: 12-05-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
410
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 5 S.C.R.
[2023] 5 S.C.R. 410
410
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT
v.
ADITYA TRIPATHI
(Criminal Appeal No. 1401 of 2023)
MAY 12, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND C. T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.]
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002: s. 45 –
Enlargement on bail – Sustainability of – Allegations of tempering
of bids – Accused chargesheeted u/ss. 120-B, 420, 468, 471 IPC
and s. 7 rw s. 13(2) of the PC Act, the scheduled offences – Offences
under the PML Act, 2002 added later – Enforcement Directorate
initiated money laundering investigation – Respondent no. 1 arrested
– Thereafter, the High Court enlarged the respondent No.1 on bail
– Sustainability of – Held: Not sustainable – High Court did not
consider the rigour of s. 45 nor considered the seriousness of the
offences alleged against accused for the schedule offences under
the PMLA Act, 2002 and that the investigation by the Enforcement
Directorate for the scheduled offences under the PML Act, 2002 is
still going on – Merely because other accused are acquitted/
discharged, it cannot be a ground not to continue the investigation
against respondent No. 1 – Merely because, for the predicated
offences the chargesheet might have been filed it cannot be a ground
to release the accused on bail in connection with the scheduled
offences under the PML Act, 2002 – Investigation for the predicated
offences and the investigation by the Enforcement Directorate for
the scheduled offences under the PML Act are different and distinct
– Matters remitted back to the High Court for afresh decision on
the bail applications – Penal Code, 1860 – ss. 120-B, 420, 468 and
471 – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – s. 7 rw s. 13(2).
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No.
1401 of 2023.
From the Judgment and Order dated 02.03.2021 of the High Court
for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad in CRLP No. 1146 of 2021.
With
Criminal Appeal no.1402 of 2023.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
411
K. M. Nataraj, A.S.G., Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Mukul Singh,
S.A. Haseeb, Mrs. Deepavali Dutta, Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Zoheb
Hussain, Kannu Agarwal, Sarath Nambiar, Advs. for the Appellant.
Rakesh Khanna, Aman Lekhi, Sr. Advs., Santosh Kumar Tripathi,
Siddharth Krishna Dwivedi, Varun K Chopra, Yugant Sharma, Ayush
Jindal, Tushar Gupta, Rohin Oza, M/s. Vkc Law Offices, Advs. for the
Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court for the State of
Telangana at Hyderabad in Criminal Petition Nos. 1146/2021 and 1147/
2021, by which, the High Court has allowed the said bail applications
and has directed to enlarge respective respondent No. 1 on bail in
connection with the offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering
Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the PML Act, 2002) investigated
by the Enforcement Directorate, Hyderabad in F. No. ECIR/HYZO/36/
2020 on the file of Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, the
Directorate of Enforcement has preferred the present appeals.
2. That an FIR No. 12/2019 dated 10.04.2019 was registered by
the Economic Offences Wing, Bhopal, naming about 20 persons/
companies as accused for the offences punishable under Sections 120-
B, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC, Section 66 of the Information Technology
Act, 2000 and Section 7(c) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988. It was found in the preliminary enquiry that e-
Tender Nos. 91,93, and 94 for total works amounting to Rs. 1769.00
crores of Madhya Pradesh Water Corporation were tempered to change
the price bid of M/s GVPR Engineers Limited, M/s The Indian Hume
Pipe Company Limited and M/s IMC (sic) Project India Limited to make
them the lowest bidders. Subsequent to the registration of the FIR,
Economic Offences Wing, Bhopal conducted investigation and filed the
chargesheet before the competent court on 04.07.2019. That on study
of chargesheet, it was found that the accused have also committed the
offences under the PML Act, 2002 as the offences for which they were
chargesheeted, namely, Sections 120-B, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC and
Section 7 read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act, are also scheduled
offences and therefore, the Enforcement Directorate, Hyderabad had
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT v. ADITYA TRIPATHI
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
412
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 5 S.C.R.
initiated money laundering investigation in the F. No. ECIR/HYZO/36/
2020. That respective respondent No
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.