Disposed

Asif Balwa v. Directorate of Enforcement and Anr.

Bombay HC1 Jun 2016APL/591/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hearing two applications to quash an order directing surrender by an F.I.A. date. The High Court granted interim protection preventing arrest until the Special Court hears pending anticipatory bail applications scheduled for June 13, 2016.

What did the court decide?

Applicants shall not be arrested or taken into custody till 13th June, 2016.

Asif Balwa Vs Directorate of Enforcement and Anr. — Money Laundering | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

prod.appln.590.591.16.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 590 OF 2016

¶3

Vinodkumar Krishnamurari Goenka ..Applicant

¶4

Vs.

¶5

The Directorate of Enforcement and Another ..Respondents

¶6

WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.591 OF 2016

¶7

Asif Balwa ..Applicant Vs. The Directorate of Enforcement and Another ..Respondents

¶8

Mr. Parimal K. Shroff, Mr. D. V. Deokar, Mr. Sachin Pandey i/b M/s Parimal K. Shroff and Co, for the Applicant in Cri. Appln. No.590/16.

¶9

Mr. Abad Ponda i/b Negandhi, Shah and Himayatullah, for the Applicant in Cri. Appln. No.591/16.

¶10

Ms. P. H. Kantharia, Special P. P., for the Respondent State-UOIDirectorate of Enforcement in both matters.

¶11

CORAM :- B.P.COLABAWALLA, J. (VACATION BENCH)

¶12

DATE :- JUNE 1, 2016.

¶13

Aswale 1/5

¶14

prod.appln.590.591.16.doc

¶15

P. C.:

¶16

Mentioned. Not on Board. By consent of parties taken on Board and heard finally.

¶17

These two applications have been filed seeking to quash and set aside that part of the order dated 25^th May, 2016 which orders the Applicants to surrender to the custody of the Special Court on 6^th June, 2016 and directing the Applicants to exercise their statutory right to get bail on the said date.

¶18

It is the case of the Applicants that much prior to the passing of the order dated 25^th May, 2016 they had already filed an Application for Anticipatory Bail on 5^th May, 2016 before the same Court which has been adjourned to 13^th June, 2016. Mr. Ponda, the learned counsel appearing for the Applicant in Criminal Application No.591 of 2016 and Mr. Shroff, the learned counsel appearing for the Applicant in Criminal Application No.590 of 2016 submitted that the order passed by the Special Court directing the Applicants to subject themselves to the custody of the Court on 6^th June, 2016 is wholly perverse in view

¶19

Aswale 2/5

¶20

prod.appln.590.591.16.doc

¶21

of the fact that the very same Court is going to hear their Anticipatory Bail Applications on 13^th June, 2016. If they are subjected to the custody of the Court on 6^th June, 2016 their Anticipatory Bail Applications would be rendered infructuous. They would therefore submit that they be protected by suitable orders of this Court until their Anticipatory Bail Applications are heard and disposed of by the Special Court.

¶22

Ms. Kantharia, the learned Special P. P. vehemently opposed the aforesaid submissions. She submitted that at the highest the hearing of the Anticipatory Bail Applications could be preponed to 6^th June, 2016 itself. In this view of the matter, there was no need to grant them any protection, was the submission.

¶23

I have heard the learned counsel at length. It is not in dispute that the case against the present Applicants arises out of P.M.L.A. Special Case No.2 of 2016, where 30 non-bailable warrants have been issued against individuals and 21 summons have been issued against certain Companies. As far as the individuals against whom non-bailable warrants have been issued, several individuals have already been granted interim protection by this Court by its order dated 13^th May, 2016 and which has

¶24

Aswale 3/5

¶25

prod.appln.590.591.16.doc

¶26

been continued by the order dated 25^th May, 2016.

¶27

In fact, I myself, following those orders in Anticipatory Bail Application No.931 of 2016, have granted interim protection to the Applicant therein till 7^th June, 2016. The distinguishing feature between these cases and Anticipatory Bail Application No.931 of 2016 is that in the present case the Applicants have already preferred Anticipatory Bail Applications before the Special Court and which are pending and slated to come up on 13^th June, 2016.

¶28

In that view of the matter, and to ensure that the Anticipatory Bail Applications preferred by the Applicants herein are not rendered infructuous, it is ordered that the Applicants herein shall not be arrested or taken into custody till 13^th June, 2016. The Special Court is requested to hear the Anticipatory Bail Applications on the said date. If for any reason the Anticipatory Bail Applications of the Applicants herein are not heard on 13^th June, 2016, the Special Court will be at liberty to continue this order on such terms and conditions as it deems fit.

¶29

Mr. Shroff and Mr. Ponda appearing on behalf of their

¶30

Aswale 4/5

¶31

prod.appln.590.591.16.doc

¶32

respective clients state that they will remain present before the Special Court on 6^th June, 2016 and appraise the Court of this order. The statements are accepted.

¶33

The above Criminal Applications are disposed of in the

¶34

aforesaid terms.

¶35

( B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.)

¶36

Aswale 5/5

Asif Balwa v. Directorate of Enforcement and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asif Balwa v. Directorate of Enforcement and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Framework Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Vs -

Sps Share Brokers Pvt. Ltd. Vs -

Sterlite Technologies Ltd. Vs -

Vinodkumar Krishnamurari Goenka Vs Directorate of Enforcement and Anr.

M/S. Rapid Radio Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S. Beegees Computers Pvt. Ltd. Cin No. U30000MH1995PTC088070

Aramex India Private Ltd. Vs Maxx Mobilink Private Limited Cin -U74990MH2008PTC188380