Asim Das Vs Directorate of Enforcement

Directorate Of Enforcement Government Of India, Represented By Its Assistant Director, Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Raipur Zonal Office A-1 Block 2nd Floor, Pujari Chambers, Pachpedi Naka, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

¶12

For Applicant	: Mr. Uttam Pandey, Advocate along with
	Ms. Pooja Sinha, Advocate
For Respondent/ED	: Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, Advocate

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravind ra Kumar Agrawal C.A.V. Order

¶14

This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested on 03.11.2023 for the offence under Sections 3 and 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for

¶15

Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN

¶16

2

¶17

short “ PMLA-2002 ”), in ECIR No. RPZO/10/2022, registered by the Enforcement Directorate, Raipur (for short “ ED ”).

¶18

The prosecution’s case is that an FIR of Crime No. 112 of 2022, registered on 29.07.2022 at Police Station Mohan Nagar, Durg, Chhattisgarh under Section 4-A of the Public Gambling (CG Amendment) Act, 1976 and Sections 420 and 120-B of IPC and Section 66-D of Information Technology Act, 2000, which was registered against five accused persons, namely Alok Singh Rajput, Ram Pravesh Sahu, Kharag @ Raja Singh, Abhishek and Pintu. The ED had registered the Enforcement Case Information Report (for short ‘ ECIR ’) No. RPZO/10/2022. On the secrete information gathered by the officers of ED, the raid was conducted on the premises of other accused persons, in which it was found a set with laptop and they were collecting money by creating online IDs and through the said IDs they were placing bets for others through Mahadev book, on online Cricket matches, Horse racing, Greyhound racing and Kabaddi, etc. Upon interrogation, the accused persons disclosed the name of two persons, namely, Abhishek and Pintu, who taught them the procedure of creating the IDs and placing bets in various sports through the Mahadev book. Initially, treating the FIR No. 112 of 2022 (Final Report No. 157/2022) of P.S. Mohan Nagar, Durg as Scheduled/Predicate Offence, the respondent/ED registered the ECIR No. RPZO/9/2022, which was re-numbered as ECIR No. RPZO/10/2022 vide corrigendum dated 07.11.2022 issued by the ED.

¶19

*******In the said ECIR, FIR No. 206/2023 dated 02.06.2023 registered at P.S. Cyber Crime Vishakhapatnam Commissionerate,

¶20

3

¶21

Andhra Pradesh, FIR No. 37/2023 registered at P.S. Bhilai Bhatti, District Durg (C.G.), FIR No. 86/2023 dated 27.02.2023 registered at P.S. Chhawani, District Durg (C.G.), FIR No. 336/2023 dated 10.08.2023 registered at P.S. Gudhiyari, District Raipur (C.G.), FIR No. 685/2023 dated 11.08.2023 registered at P.S. Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.), FIR No. 6/2024 dated 04.03.2024 registered at EOW, Raipur (C.G.) and FIR No. 206/2020 dated 24.09.2020 registered at P.S. Burtola, Kolkata, West Bengal, have been included in the said ECIR.

¶22

*******On 20.10.2023, the ED filed its first prosecution complaint against 14 accused persons, alleging that the online gambling app in the name of Mahadev Online Book is established for illegal betting in different live games like; poker, card games, chance games, betting on cricket, badminton, tennis, football, etc. and also to provide facility for playing several card games like; teen patti, dragon tiger, virtual cricket games using cards, etc. It is also alleged that the Mahadev Online Book advertised about these betting websites through closed WhatsApp groups and Facebook pages.

¶23

*******During the investigation conducted by the ED, it comes in the investigation that the promoters of the Mahadev Online Book, namely S ourabh Chandrakar and Ravi Uppal, were running the said illegal betting app through online mode and the tentacles of the online betting app have been spread wide enough and the promoters created a system of franchising the panels for illegal online betting app within the Indian territory as well as at abroad. The betting app is operated by various panel/branches, which are sold in a small franchise by the

¶24

4

¶25

promoters Sourabh Chandrakar and Ravi Uppal through their associates. An elaborate system to receive incoming money from the betting user and also to pay them back as winning amount has been created in a well planned manner. They created a system that the betting user cannot directly pay money on the website and they need to contact on WhatsApp and deposit money into bank accounts in India, which have been obtained by the panel operators/promoters by way of deceiving and cheating the peoples. All centres will tag him with a panel, which will share the bank account details and create the user ID, allocate points/tokens etc. The promoters keep nearly 70-75% of the profit of the panel operations. A panel has an owner and workers who are usually four in numbers. One person can own multiple panels and there was no bar on number of panels being operated by one person. The head office is at Dubai who creates ID and password for the panel owners. The panel operator using the IDs can further create sub-IDs for player/punters. The IDs are generally created on multiple websites as depicted on the app of Mahadev online book. After receiving the details of panel, the players/punters deposit the minimum amount of Rs.100/- for online betting with no maximum amount. All the games are rigged in a manner that overall, the panel owners will not lose money. During the investigation, multiple panel operators were raided, who were working under the Mahadev online book and it came on record that the said betting syndicate was generating proceeds of crime worth Rs. 450 crores per month through the panel operations. It also came in the investigation that Sourabh Chandrakar and Ravi Uppal in the entire investigation to

¶26

5

¶27

be the kingpin of the betting empire and indulge in money laundering with their associates. In the investigation, it also come that the said panel operations was running with active support and connivance of local police and politicians and after receiving illegal gratification, they supported the said illegal betting racket by closing their eyes. It also come that one ASI Chandrabhushan Verma who acted as Liaisoner for the Mahadev online book promoters with political executives of the Chhattisgarh State, who negotiated between them. He was collecting Hawala payments made available by the promoters of Mahadev book and distributing the same to the bureaucrats/politicians for ensuring smooth operations of the illegal betting websites. The funds have moved in and out of India to Dubai through various channels. Involvement of a number of persons were found during the investigation including the persons who engaged in layering the proceeds of crime.

¶28

*******During the investigation, the ED came to know that the present applicant is engaged in handling the illegal funds generated from the promoters of Mahadev Online Book. On 02.11.2023, the present applicant had come to Raipur from Dubai on the instructions of Mr. Subham Soni @ Pintu for delivery of cash amount emanating from the betting operations. When he stayed at Hotel Triton at Raipur a search was conducted on 02.11.2023 and in the car which was in his possession, the cash amount of Rs. 3,11,70,000/- have been seized and from the search of his residential house at Bhilai (C.G.), cash amount of Rs. 2,27,47,500/- have been seized from him. It also reveals that previously also the applicant travelled to Dubai on the

¶29

6

¶30

instructions of Shubham Soni @ Pintu and all the expenses were incurred out of the betting proceeds. While replying the summons under Section 50 issued to Subham Soni @ Pintu, he replied through e-mail that the present applicant is his Liaisoner with the politicians and bureaucrats in the State of Chhattisgarh and from the mobile phones of the applicant, the relevant data and call details have been recovered, which connects him with the other accused persons. Seizure of Rs. 5.39 Crores from the present applicant itself evident that he was managing the illegal funds derived from Mahadev Book and it was the proceeds of crime intended for delivery under the instructions of Shubham Soni @ Pintu and he knowingly possessed and managed the proceeds of crime and thus, considering his prima facie involvement in the offence in question, he has been arrested on 03.11.2023 and presently in judicial custody, in which he is claiming regular bail.

¶31

The applicant is actively involved in money laundering having been touch with bureaucrats to run the Mahadev Online Book without any objection. Thus, the applicant committed the offence of money laundering as defined under Section 3 of PMLA-2002, which is punishable under Section 4 of PMLA-2002 against whom the prosecution complaint has been filed.

¶32

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no evidence in the prosecution complaint that the applicant had travelled from Dubai to Raipur just before when he was arrested. He is neither the owner of the car from which the cash amount of Rs. 3,11,00,000/have been seized nor he was the occupant of the said car, when the

¶33

7

¶34

amount was seized. He was also not there in his house, when the amount of Rs. 2,27,00,000/- is said to have been seized by the ED. The source of such a huge amount has also not been investigated by the ED. There is no connection with the other accused person either physically or telephonically. The applicant is in jail since 03.11.2023 and till date there is no information about the trial as to when it will commence. There are number of witnesses cited by the prosecution in the prosecution complaint, which may take years together to be examined. Till date, even the charges have not been framed against the applicant and although the prosecution complaint has been filed against the present applicant, but the investigation is still continued. He would also submit that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has deprecated the pre-trial detention and speedy trial is the fundamental right of the accused guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He would rely upon the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of “ Prem Prakash v. Union of India, through the Directorate of Enforcement ” 2024 (9) SCC 787 and “ Tapas Kumar Palit v. State of Chhattisgarh ” 2025 SCC Online SC 322 and has submitted that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, allegation against the present applicant and also his long detention period, he may be released on bail.

¶35

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/ED has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that the present applicant Asim Das was in constant touch with Subham Soni @ Pintu, who is one of the main perpetrator of Mahadev Book App and running the operations of the

¶36

8

¶37

App and payments made as liaisoning money. On 02.11.2023, he came to Raipur from Dubai under the instructions of Subham Soni @ Pintu and stayed at Hotel Triton at Raipur. From the car, in which he was traveling and came to hotel at Raipur, a huge cash amount of Rs. 3,11,70,000/- was seized. When the ED searched his residential house at Bhilai (C.G.), cash of Rs. 2,27,47,500/- have also been seized. Subham Soni @ Pintu, in his e-mail submission against the summon dated 26.10.2023 under Section 50 of PMLA-2002 has stated that the present applicant has acted as his liaisoner with the politicians in the State of Chhattisgarh. The voice messages from Subham Soni have been retrieved from the mobile phone seized from the present applicant and the voice recording clearly reveals that the present applicant was directed to go to Raipur to supply cash amount and thus, the present applicant is fully aware about the betting operations generated from Mahadev Book and the same is the proceeds of crime. Despite that he willingly and knowingly involved in the said illegal activities related to money laundering. The seizure of Rs. 5.39 Crores cash amount itself shows that he was managing the illegal funds derived from the Mahadev Online Book. There is sufficient evidence that he closely connected with Subham Soni @ Pintu, who is one of the main perpetrators of the offence and thus in lieu of his involvement in the offence of money laundering as defined under Section 3 of PMLA-2002, he was arrested by ED on 03.11.2023, and therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

¶38

******In support of his contention, he also relied upon the judgement of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India , 2022 SCC OnLine SC

¶39

9

¶40

929, Pawana Dibbur v. Directorate of Enforcement (Criminal Appeal No. 2779 of 2023), Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. CBI , (2013) 7 SCC 439, State of Gujarat v. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal and others , (1987) 2 SCC 364 and submitted that mere delay in trial pertaining to grave offence cannot be a ground to grant bail. He would also submit that observing the economic offence is committed with deliberate design, with an eye on personal profit, regardless to the consequence to the community, which will damage to the national economy and national interest, and therefore the applicant is not entitled for bail and his bail application is liable to be dismissed.

¶41

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed in the present case by both the parties.

¶42

For consideration of the bail application under PMLA, 2002 the Court need not go deep inside the merits of the case but should consider the prima facie material against the accused in the case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary case (supra) has observed in para 401 of its judgment that:-

¶43

"401. We are in agreement with the observation made by the Court in Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma [(2005) 5 SCC 294). The Court while dealing with the application for grant of bail need not delve deep into the merits of the case and only a view of the Court based on available material on record is required. The Court will not weigh the evidence to find the guilt of the accused which is, of course, the work of Trial Court. The Court is only required to place its view based on probability on the basis of

¶44

10

¶45

reasonable material collected during the investigation and the said view will not be taken into consideration by the Trial Court in recording its finding of the guilt or acquittal during trial which is based on the evidence adduced during the trial. As explained by this Court in Nimmagadda Prasad [(2013) 7 SCC 466], the words used in Section 45 of the 2002 Act are "reasonable grounds for believing" which means the Court has to see only if there is a genuine case against the accused and the prosecution is not required to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt."

¶46

In the case of Satish Jaggi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh , (2007) 11 SCC 195, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that "at the stage of granting of bail, the Court can only go into the question of prima facie case established for granting bail, it cannot go into the question of credibility and reliability of witnesses put up by the prosecution. The question of credibility and reliability of prosecution witnesses can only be tested during trial."

¶47

The Delhi High Court in its order dated 07.03.2024 passed in Bail Application No. 3807/2022 (Sanjay Jain Vs. Enforcement Directorate) after relying upon the observations made in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (Supra) has observed in para 49 that:-

¶48

"49. It thus, emerges that at the stage of considering a bail application under the PMLA, the Court has to bear in mind the following aspects:

¶49

11

¶50

(i ) Whether the accused possessed the requisite mens rea.

¶51

(ii) The words used in Section 45 of the 2002 Act are "reasonable grounds for believing" which means the Court has to see only if there is a genuine case against the accused and the prosecution is not required to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt.

¶52

(iii) A positive finding that the accused had not committed an offence under the Act is not required to be recorded. A delicate balance between a judgment of acquittal/conviction and an order granting bail much before commencement of the trial is to be maintained.

¶53

(iv) The evidence is not to be weighed meticulously but a finding is to be arrived at on the basis of broad probabilities with reference to the material collected during investigation. The weighing of evidence to find the guilt of the accused is the work of Trial Court.

¶54

(v) A finding is also required to be recorded as to the possibility of the bail applicant committing a crime after grant of bail. This aspect has to be considered having regard to the antecedents of the accused, his propensities and the nature and manner in which he is alleged to have committed the offence."

¶55

In the matter of “ State of Bihar v. Amit Kumar ” 2017 (13) SCC 751, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that:

¶56

12

¶57

"11... Although "bail is the rule and jail is an exception" is well established in our jurisprudence, we have to measure competing forces present in facts and circumstances of each case before enlarging a person on bail.

¶58

13...It is well settled that socio-economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. Usually socioeconomic offence has deeprooted conspiracies affecting the moral fibre of the society and causing irreparable harm, needs to be considered seriously.

¶59

14. Further, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the investigating agency is going to file additional chargesheet. Therefore, the respondent's presence in the custody may be necessary for further investigation.”

¶60

In the present case, from the possession of the applicant, a huge cash amount of Rs. 5.39 Crores have been seized for which he has not given any explanation to the ED, rather the investigation reveals that he is closely related with Subham Soni @ Pintu. He visited Dubai a number of times on the instructions of said Subham Soni @ Pintu, who is one of the main perpetrators of the crime. On his reply, it has been stated that the present applicant is a liaisoner with the politicians in the State of Chhattisgarh. Just before the seizure of cash amount from him, he traveled from Dubai to Raipur and when he had gone to the Hotel Triton to deliver the cash amount to a particular politician, he has been caught by the ED. From his mobile phone, the relevant datas have been extracted, which clearly demonstrated the connection with the present applicant with the persons, who running

¶61

13

¶62

the Mahadev Online Book and the applicant knowingly and willingly engaged himself in layering of the proceeds of crime.

¶63

The proceeds of crime have been defined under Section 2(1)(u) of the PMLA-2002, which reads as under:

¶64

"2(1)(u)- "proceeds of crime" means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property, or where such property is taken or held outside the country, then the property equivalent in value held within the country or abroad;

¶65

Explanation:- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that "proceeds of crime" including property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence."

¶66

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs. CBI , reported in (2013) 7 SCC 439 has held in para 34 and 35 of its judgment that

¶67

"34. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deeprooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country.

¶68

14

¶69

35. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations.

¶70

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra) has observed in para 398 as under :-

¶71

"398. Thus, it is well settled by the various decisions of this Court and policy of the State as also the view of international community that the offence of money-laundering is committed by an individual with a deliberate design with the motive to enhance his gains, disregarding the interests of nation and society as a whole and which by no stretch of imagination can be termed as offence of trivial nature. Thus, it is in the interest of the State that law enforcement agencies should be provided with a proportionate effective mechanism so as to deal with these types of offences as the wealth of the nation is to be safeguarded from these dreaded criminals. As discussed above, the conspiracy of money-laundering, which is a three-staged process, is hatched in secrecy and executed in darkness, thus, it becomes imperative for the State to frame such a stringent law, which not only punishes the

¶72

15

¶73

offender proportionately, but also helps in preventing the offence and creating a deterrent effect."

¶74

Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and also from the material produced in the present case, it is not acceptable that the present applicant did not know about the transactions that the amount utilized by him not comes from Mahadev online book. Denial by the accused itself is not sufficient to consider prima facie that there is no mens rea of the applicant for the said offence under the PMLA-2002.

¶75

Considering the nature of allegation against the present applicant and also the material collected during the investigation and further the gravity of the offence, the benefit of the judgments cited by the learned counsel for the applicant cannot be extended to him for releasing him on bail at this stage, as the facts and circumstances of the present case and the allegation against the applicant is different than the facts and circumstances of the cases cited by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶76

As has been discussed hereinabove, it cannot be said that there is no involvement of the applicant in the offence in question. Considering the role of the applicant in the ensuing money laundering case of proceeds of crime in the Mahadev Book App, it is found that there is sufficient evidence collected by the ED/respondent to prima facie show the involvement of the applicant in the offence of money laundering as defined under Section 3 of the PMLA, 2002. It is an organized crime having various facets of its complexion, therefore,

¶77

16

¶78

further considering the provisions of Section 45 of the PMLA, 2002 this Court is satisfied that there is reasonable ground for believing that the applicant is involved in the offence and he is likely to commit any other offence while on bail, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶79

Consequently, the present bail application filed by the applicant- Asim

¶80

Das is rejected .

¶81

Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶82

ved

Asim Das v. Directorate of Enforcement

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asim Das v. Directorate of Enforcement

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Rashi Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Himanshu Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Daljeet Singh Chawla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shivani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Nandini Mandelkar Vs Director of Public Instruction

Ramsagar Sinha Vs State of Chhattisgarh