LexUNION OF INDIA versus HASSAN ALI KHAN AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2011] 11 S.C.R. 778 UNION OF INDIA v. HASSAN ALI KHAN AND ANR. (Criminal Appeal No. 1883 of 2011) SEPTEMBER 30, 2011 [ALTAMAS KABIR AND SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, JJ.] BAIL: Allegations against respondent no. 1 that he had C huge amount of unaccounted money, that documents recovered from his premises contained instructions issued by him for transfer of various amounts to different persons from the bank accounts held by him outside India and the said monies were the proceeds of crime and by depositing the o same in his bank accounts, respondent no. 1 had attempted to project the same as untainted money - Further allegation that the said amount ran into billions of dollars; that respondent no. 1 had obtained at least three passports in his name by submitting false documents, making false E statements and by suppressing the fact that he already had a passport; that Income Tax Department had for the Assessment Years 2001-02 to 2007-08 assessed his total income as Rs. 110, 412, 68, 853031- - Investigations also revealed that he sold a diamond from the collection of Nizam F of Hyderabad and routed the proceeds through his account in Bank in Switzerland to a Bank in United Kingdom - High Court allowed bail application of respondent no. 1 - On appeal, held: There was no attempt on part of respondent no. 1 to disclose the source of the large sums of money handled by G him - The allegations may not ultimately be established, but the burden of proof that the said monies were not the proceeds of crime and were not tainted shifted to respondent no. 1 uls.24 of PML Act - The amount lying in the Swiss bank was not explained by respondent no. 1 - He was also not able to H 778 UNION OF INDIA v. HASSAN ALI KHAN AND ANR. 779 establish that the sum of Rs.110,412,68,853031- were neither A proceeds of crime nor tainted property - Manner irr which he procured three different passports in his name after his original passport was directed to be deposited in court a/so lend support to apprehension that if released on bail, he may abscond - Bail granted to Respondent no. 1 cancelled - B Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 - s.4 - FEMA - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.439. Bail - Application for cancellation of bail, and appeal against order granting bail - Distinction between. State of U. P. v. Amarmani Tripathi (2005) 8 SCC 21 : 2005 (3) Suppl. SCR 454 - relied on. c Sanjay Dutt v. State through CBI, Bombay (II) (1994) 5 SCC 410: 1994 (3) Suppl. SCR 263; Uday Mohan/a/ Acharya D v. State of Maharashtra (2001) 5 SCC 453: 2001 (2) SCR 878 - referred to. Case Law Reference: 1994 (3) Suppl. SCR 263 referred to 2001 (2) SCR 878 referred to Para 17 Para 17 2005 (3) Suppl. SCR 454 relied on Para 27 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 11383 of 2011. From the Judgment & Order dated 12.8.2011 of the High Court of Bombay i Criminal Bail Appliction No. 994 of 2011. E F A. Mariarputham, Rajiv Nanda, Revati Mohite, T.A. Khan, G Anirudh Sharma, Anando Mukherjee, Harsh Parekh and B. Krishna Prasad for the Appellant. lshwari Prasad A. Bagarla, Vijay Bhaskar Reddy, Santosh Paul, Uma lshwari Bagaria, Arti Singh, Arvind Gupta, Mohita H 780 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 11 S.C.R. A Bagati, Kamal Nijhawan and Asha Gopalan Nair for the Respondents. B The Order of the Court was delivered by ORDER ALTAMAS KABIR, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The Special Leave Petition out of which this Appeal arises has been filed against the judgment and final order dated C 12th August, 2011, passed by the Bombay High Court in Crl. · .. Bail Application No.994 of 2011, whereby the High Court · granted bail to the Respondent No.1, Rassan Ali Khan, in connection with Special Case No.1 of 2011, wherein the Respondent No.1 is the Accused No.1. D 3. The allegation against the Respondent No.1 and the other accused is that they have committed an offence punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, hereinafter referred to as 'the PML Act'. The said case has been registered on the basis of a complaint E filed by the Deputy Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India, on 8th January, 2007, on the basis of Enforcement Case Information Report No.02/MZ0/07 based on certain information and documents received from the Income Tax Department. On F the said date, the Income Tax Department
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.