Nafr High Court · 2025
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:1549 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6581 of 2024 Order reserved on 07/11/2024 Order delivered on 09/01/2025 Rahul Vakte S/o. Balu Vakte Aged About 34 Years R/o. Behind Devpuri, Near Neeraj School, Vikas Nagar, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) versus ... Applicant(s) State Of Chhattisgarh Through Additional Superintendent Of Police, Economic Offence Wing/Anti Corruption Bureau, District - Raipur (C.G.) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant For Respondent/State : : Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Gagan Tiwari, Ms. Ritika Dubey, and Ms. Kajal Chandrakar, Advocates Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, Deputy A.G. and Mr. Mayur Khandelwal, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravind ra Kumar Agrawal C.A.V. Order 1. 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 23.04.2024 for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 201, 120-B of IPC, Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN 2 Sections 7 and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 and Sections 4, 7, 8 and 11 of the Chhattisgarh Gambling (Prohibition) Act, 2022 and Section 4A of Public Gambling Act, 1867, registered at Economic Offence Wing/Anti-Corruption Bureau, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, in Crime No. 6 of 2024. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that, an FIR of Crime No. 112/2022 registered on 29.07.2022 at Police Station Mohan Nagar, Durg (C.G.) under Section 4A of the Public Gambling (C.G. Amendment) Act, 1976, which was registered against five accused persons, namely, Alok Singh Rajput, Rampravesh Sahu, Kharag @ Raja Singh, Abhishek and Pintu, under Section 4A of the Public Gambling (C.G. Amendment) Act, 1976 and Section 420, 120B of the IPC and also for Section 66D of Information Technology Act, 2000. The Enforcement Directorate had registered the Enforcement Case Information Report (hereinafter referred as 'ECIR') No. RPZ0/10/2022. On the secret information gathered by the officers of the ED, the raid was conducted on the premises of the accused persons in which it was found that a set with a 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, kabaddi etc. Upon interrogation, the accused persons disclosed the names of two persons namely Abhishek and Pintu who taught them to procedure of creating the IDs and placing bets in various sports through the
Facts
Mahadev Book. Initially, treating the FIR No. 112/2022 of P.S. Mohan Nagar, Durg and final report dated 29.07.2022 as scheduled/ 3 predicate offence, the respondent ED registered the ECIR No. RPZO/09/2022 which was renumbered as ECIR No. RPZ0/10/2022 vide corrigendum dated 07.11.2022 issued by the ED. *******In the said ECIR, FIR No. 206/2023 dated 02.06.2023 registered at P.S. Cyber Crime Vishakhapattanam Commissionerate, 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. *******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. *******On 01.01.2024, the ED filed the first Supplementary Prosecution Complaint before the learned Special Judge (PMLA), 4 Raipur. The ED issued summons to the accused persons. On 11.03.2024, the ED filed the second Supplementary Complaint before the learned Special Court of PMLA, Raipur. *******On 01.03.2024, the Enforcement Directorate have shared the information to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Economic Offence Wing and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Raipur, Chhattisgarh under******* the provisions of Section 66(2) of the PMLA-2002 and disclosed the information about the ECIR No. RPZO/10/2022 and subsequent complaint filed by it. In the said information, it has been disclosed that the Mahadev online book has been running for illegal betting in different live games like poker, card games, etc. and the promoters of the Mahadev online betting app is regulating the said app from its head office at Dubai. The promoters have given franchisee of the said online betting app to various panel operators to manage the business on day-to-day basis. Along with the information, the ED annexed the documents available to them with respect to the involvement of the accused persons in the Mahadev online betting app. *******On the basis of letter dated 01.03.2024, the EOW/ACB registered an FIR under the Crime No. 6/2024 on 04.03.2024, for the offence under Sections 120B, 34, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC and Sections 7 and 11 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended by Amendment Act of the year 2018), in which 20 accused persons have been named along with other unknown accused persons. During the investigation, it comes that he is closely related with the co-accused Chandrabhushan Verma, who used to visit his 5 house frequently and from the statement of Chandrabhushan Verma and other witnesses and also from the analysis of CDR, it reveals that the present applicant used to collect the Hawala money, which was sent from Mahadev book, through Abhushan Jewellers owned by Sunil Dammani and Anil Dammani. The present applicant Rahul Vakte and the co-accused Chandrabhushan Verma and Satish Chandrakar had direct connection with Mahadev book promoters Ravi Uppal and Sourabh Chandrakar. Satish Chandrakar got panels from Mahadev book promoters and given it on rent. Chandrabhushan Verma used to receive huge amount of Hawala money from Anil Dammani and Sunil Dammani and the present applicant Rahul Vakte collect the same to distribute it as liaison money. Ravi Uppal had sent Rs. 50 lakh in cash every month as protection money through Hawala out of which Rs. 5 lakh was given to Satish Chandrakar. This Rs. 5 lakh was delivered by the present applicant to Satish Chandrakar, which has been confirmed by the CDR analysis and the tower location of their mobile phones. *******The present applicant has got the panel of Mahadev book from Ravi Uppal. He also involved in fake and bogus billing for illegal transaction of money in the firms running on the instructions of Chandrabhushan Verma. After recording statement under Section 161 of CRPC of the witnesses- Dilip Kumar Agrawal, Gopal Krishna Agrawal, Vikas @ Vicky Malghani, Eid Muhammad, Kamlesh
Legal Reasoning
the role of the accused and also the prima facie evidence available against him. In the present case, there is sufficient evidence available against the present applicant that he is involved in the alleged offence and looking to the seriousness of the offence, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 11 5. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed in the present case by both the parties. For consideration of the bail application of the applicant, 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:- "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 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." 7. 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 12 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." 8. 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:- "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: (i) Whether the accused possessed the requisite mens rea. (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. (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. (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 13 find the guilt of the accused is the work of Trial Court. (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." 9. In the present case from the statement of Dilip Kumar Agrawal, it reveals that he is the proprietor of two firms namely; Hitanshu Foods (Hitanshu Rice Mill) and Kanha Food Grains and the other firms namely; Aditya Trading Company, Srijan Associates, Srijan Trading Company, Srijan Enterprises Limited, M.K. Enterprises have made entries of cash transaction in the bank account of his aforesaid two firms, but there is no actual transaction of any commodities. In his statement he stated the details of bogus transactions made in his firm. He further stated that by the said bogus transactions and entries in the bank account, he received total Rs. 4,88,90,450/- and after retaining of his commission, the remaining amount has been handed over to Vikky @ Vikas Malghani, who subsequently given it to Chandrabhushan Verma, Mohammed Jasif and present applicant Rahul Vakte through Gopal Krishna Agrawal and Atul Garg. From the statement of Gopal Krishna Agrawal also the bogus transaction as stated by Dilip Kumar Agrawal has been confirmed and it reveals that the present applicant has also received the amount of bogus entries, which comes through the proceeds of crime of Mahadev online book. From the statement of Smt. Fingeshwari Verma, who is the wife of 14 Chandrabhushan Verma, it also comes in the record that her husband had purchased certain properties at Raipur and the present applicant and other persons have closely related with her husband. The firm Srijan Trading Company, Srijan Ventures, Aditya Trading Company, Srijan Consultancy Services, Srijan Associates and Srijan Enterprises Private Limited are owned by her family members and relatives. Her husband has informed her that the present applicant Rahul Vakte is the person who delivers the amount to him, which has been obtained through Hawala operation. From the statement of Swetabh Suman Singh @ Sunny the connection of the present applicant with the other accused persons and their close association with them in illegal activities of circulation of money through Hawala operation has been clearly revealed and the name of present applicant is appears in the statement of the witnesses that he also involved in the illegal activities of circulation of the money. Further, from the statement of Gopal Krishna Agrawal, Vikas @ Vikki Malghani, Eid Mohammad, Kamlesh Kesharwani, Smt. Yashoda Verma, Smt. Mukteshwari Verma, Poonaram Verma, Shiv Kumar Verma and Manish Verma the involvement of the applicant in the offence in question is prima facie appears that the applicant is actively involved in the offence and knowingly handled the illegal money generated from the Mahadev online book. 10. 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 15 "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 deep-rooted 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. 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. 11. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (supra) has observed in para 398 as under :- "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 16 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 offender proportionately, but also helps in preventing the offence and creating a deterrent effect." 12. Having considered the rival submissions made by respective parties as also from the material produced in the present case, it is not acceptable that the present applicant did not know about the transactions of Mahadev online book and the money obtained by him comes through Hawala operations, which is the illegal source of his income. Denial by the applicant itself is not sufficient to consider prima facie case that there is no mens rea of the applicant for the said offence either under the IPC or under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Although the statement of the witnesses are required to be tested at the time of trial for the purpose of consideration of bail application, the statement of the witnesses are relevant for consideration of bail application of the applicant. 13. As has been discussed herein above, it cannot be said that there is no involvement of the applicant in the offence in question. Considering the role of the applicant in obtaining money through illegal source which is the proceeds of crime in the Mahadev book app, it is found that there is sufficient evidence collected by the EOW/ACB to prima facie show the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offences. It is an organized crime having various facets of its complexion, therefore, further considering the nature of offence and material collected during the investigation, this Court is satisfied that there is prima facie evidence for believing that the applicant is 17 involved in the offence, therefore, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 14. Consequently, the present bail application filed by the applicant is rejected. ved Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge
Arguments
Kesharwani, Smt. Fingeshwari Verma, Smt. Yashoda Verma, Smt. Mukteshwari Verma, Poonaram Verma, Shiv Kumar Verma, Manish Verma and Swetabh Suman Singh and also recording of 164 CRPC 6 statement of Swetabh Suman Singh and memorandum statement of other accused persons, the applicant was arrested on 23.04.2024 and charge sheet has been filed on 19.07.2024. 3. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant would submit that the investigating agency has acted most arbitrarily and it had nothing, but ill-motivated and mala fide intention to implicate the applicant in the offence. The applicant is not named in the FIR and he is having no connection or association in any way either in the affairs of the business of Mahadev online book or has received the proceeds of crime through Hawala operations to deliver it to anyone. The prosecution has failed to establish the link of the present applicant with the alleged offence and he has been made an accused only on the basis of presumption. The prosecution has levelled allegations against the applicant regarding forging of documents or valuable security, but the ingredients of the same are missing in the case. There is no complaint from any individual that the applicant has intentionally created documents or electronic records for the purposes of cheating or he actually been cheated. He would further submit that the conventional statement of co-accused is very weak type of evidence and accept that there is no other evidence available in the case against the present applicant. He would further submit that the applicant is already in custody since 23.04.2024 and till date even the charges have not been framed and 145 witnesses are cited, which certainly take a long time for conclusion of the trial of the case. *******In support of his submissions, he would rely upon the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI 7 and another, (2022) 10 SCC 51, Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement, order dated 12.07.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2493 of 2024, Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1920, Siddharth v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2022) 1 SCC 676, Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P., 1994 Cr.L.J. 1981 and submitted that looking to the period of his custody, he is cooperative during the entire investigation and there is no possibility of tampering with the witnesses or document as the investigation has already been completed. Therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State, apart from the reply in writing opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that on an information received from ED with respect to ECIR No. RPZO/10/2022, the EOW/ACB, Raipur has registered an offence under the Crime No. 6 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 34, 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC and Sections 7 and 11 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended on 2018) against 19 named accused persons, the concerned bureaucrats/police authorities and unknown other persons. During the investigation by the EOW/ACB, it was found that the promoters of Mahadev Book App are Ravi Uppal, Shubham Soni, Sourabh Chandrakar and Anil Kumar Agrawal, who created an online platform for illegal betting in various live games and started through various websites, like; WhatsApp, Facebook, Telegram. These online platform was operated through penal operators/branch operators. Out of total illegal earning, 70 to 80% of 8 their earning were kept for themselves and the remaining amount was given to penal operators. It also reveals that since 2020, the promoters, penal operators and other associated persons have earned illegal income of about Rs. 450 crores monthly through the online betting app. For transaction of the money, they opened bank accounts on the basis of fake documents and it was channelized up to the promoters of Mahadev Book App by penal operators to UAE. They also organized ‘Annual Star-Studded’ events for promotion of their online betting appellant, in which the celebrities were also involved. The illegal money received from online betting app were invested in various shell companies and stock market. To run the illegal betting app and to protect from legal action, the police, administrative officers and influential political persons were also regularly paid huge amount through Hawala operation, by which the amount was distributed to them. In this way the promoters of Mahadev Book App along with their penal operators, checkers, punters, public servants and others entered into a criminal conspiracy and earned huge amount of illegal income through online betting and 20 persons have been named in the FIR including other unnamed accused persons. *******On the basis of the evidence collected during the investigation and statement of the witnesses, it comes against the present applicant that the present applicant is having closed relation with co- accused Chandrabhushan Verma and used to visit his house frequently. From the statement of Chandrabhushan Verma and other witnesses and also from the analysis of CDR and other facts reveals 9 during investigation, it comes that the present applicant Rahul Vakte used to collect the Hawala money sent from Mahadev book to Abhushan jewelers owned by Sunil Dammani and Anil Dammani. The present applicant and Chandrabhushan Verma and Satish Chandrakar are having direct connection with Ravi Uppal, who is the promoter of Mahadev book. The co-accused Satish Chandrakar got panels from Mahadev book promoters and gave them on rent. The co-accused Chandrabhushan Verma used to receive huge amount of Hawala money from Anil Dammani and Sunil Dammani through the present applicant Rahul Vakte to distribute it as liaison money. Rs. 5 lakh in every month was to be paid to Satish Chandrakar, which was being delivered by the present applicant. The said connection is confirmed through the CDR analysis and tower location of the mobile phone of the present applicant. The present applicant has also got a panel of Mahadev book from its promoter Ravi Uppal. The present applicant is also involved in fake and bogus billing by running several firms for illegal money transactions. From the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 of CRPC, 164 of CRPC, CDR analysis report, memorandum statement of the co-accused persons are pointed towards guilt of the present applicant and considering that there is sufficient evidence against the present applicant, he has been arrested on 23.04.2024 and charge sheet has been filed against him, although he has not been named in the FIR. *******He would also submit that when the EOW/ACB received an information of cognizable offence, he has to register the FIR as per the direction issued by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Lalita 10 Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2008) 7 SCC 164. The ECIR is not an FIR, but is a complaint. He would further submit that for commission of offence under Section 3 of PMLA, it is not necessary that a person must also commit the predicate offence. He would also submit that the involvement in the criminal activity is the relevant consideration. A person can be held guilty in money laundering, even if he is not named in the scheduled offence. In support of his contention, he relied upon the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929. In the present case, the offence under the money laundering act is not akin to the offence of IPC or the Prevention of Corruption Act. The offence of money laundering is entirely different from the offence of cheating or forgery of the valuable security/document. He would also relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State Through CBI v. Anil Sharma, (1997), 7 SCC 187, in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered that the custodial interrogation is a qualitative method of interrogation and ED has only shared certain information with the EOW/ACB, and it is for the EOW/ACB to interrogate the allegations of the information. Therefore, there is need to arrest to the applicant and to interrogate him. While considering the bail application, the allegations in the charge sheet against the applicant is the relevant consideration and