SC grants interim bail to Jharkhand businessman Amit Kumar Agarwal in money laundering case
Dec 17, 2022
New Delhi [India], December 17 : The Supreme Court has granted interim bail to Jharkhand businessman Amit Kumar Agarwal in a money laundering case with conditions that he will provide one mobile phone number on which he can be contacted by the authorities to ascertain his whereabouts.
"In the context of the present case, for the time being, we direct that the petitioner Amit Kumar Agarwal will be released on interim bail on terms and conditions which will be fixed by the trial court," the court said.
"The petitioner will provide one mobile phone number on which he can be contacted by the authorities to ascertain his whereabouts, while he is on interim bail," the court further observed.
The petitioner will also deposit his passport in the trial court and will not leave India without permission of the Court, the court said.
The petitioner will also appear in the office of the Directorate Enforcement as and when summoned.
The court noted that Rajeev Kumar, the co-accused, has been granted bail. However Additional Solicitor General on instructions has stated that the said order is being challenged. The top court clarified that this order is not a comment on the merits of the order granting bail to Rajeev Kumar.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court issued notice to ED on Amit Kumar Agarwal's plea challenging the Jharkhand High Court order dated November 30, 2022.
Jharkhand High Court has dismissed Amit Kumar Agarwal's plea seeking quashing of the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) against him filed by ED and his arrest by the probe agency.
Directorate of Enforcement, Ranchi Zonal Office, Ranchi lodged an ECIR under Section 120B, 384 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
According to the petitioner, a complaint was made by him to Hare Street Police Station, Kolkata on July 31, 2022, and a case was registered by that police station at
Kolkata. He submitted that he was not an accused in Hare Street, however, the Directorate of Enforcement without any rhyme, reason or jurisdiction, has registered ECIR, so far as this petitioner is concerned.
According to him, it is the source of information for the Directorate of Enforcement and this petitioner is a whistle-blower, who has been accused by the Directorate of Enforcement without jurisdiction. The petitioner has told the HC that when the predicate offence is not against the petitioner, the registration of the said ECIR case against the petitioner is without jurisdiction.
Agarwal had alleged that Kumar demanded money on the pretext of softening his stand in a petition against him in the High court. However, ED alleged that the money paid by Agarwal to Kumar was to allegedly hamper the ongoing PIL for his gain.
