-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1794 OF 2009 Radha Mohan Lakhotia ...Applicant vs. 1 The Union of India 2 The Additional Director, Directorate of Enforcement 3 The State of Maharashtra ...Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1796 OF 2009 Asha Lakhotia ...Applicant vs. 1 The Union of India 2 The Additional Director, Directorate of Enforcement 3 The State of Maharashtra ...Respondents Mr.Naresh Thacker for the applicant in both the applications Mr.S.R.Shinde withMs Revati Mohite Dere for respondent no.1. Ms A.T.Javeri A.P.P for State CORAM : A.S.OKA,J. DATE : JUNE 8, 2009 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. The applicant in criminal application no.1794 of 2009 is the accused no.6 and the applicant in criminal application no.1796 of 2009 is the accused no.7. The first respondent filed a complaint -2- before the learned designated Judge under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act of 2002 at Mumbai alleging commission of an offence under section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act,2002 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act). 2 The learned counsel for the applicant has invited my attention to the averments made in the complaint. He submitted that there is no material on record to show that the amounts allegedly received by the applicant are proceeds of the crime within the meaning of section 2 (u)of the said Act. He submitted that Shri R.P.Modani who is the person from whom the applicants have allegedly received the amounts has not been shown as accused. He invited my attention to the communication dated 23 rd January 2007 issued by the Superintendent of Narcotic Control Bureau to the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcements. He submitted that the said letter clearly shows that even the Narcotic Control Bureau found that the link between the 200 kgs of cocaine and the funds transferred from R.D.Modani s account to various individuals has not been established. He, therefore, submitted that there is no link between the amounts allegedly received by the applicant in -3- these applications and the funds allegedly derived or obtained from criminal activity. 3 I have carefully considered the submissions. It will be necessary to refer to the various averments made in the complaint and in particular averments made in paragraph No.2.6 and paragraph 24. Paragraph 2.6 reads thus : 2.6 Accused no.6, Radha Mohan Lakhotia is Brother-inlaw of Rajendra Prasad Modani, who had received part of proceeds of crime amounting to Rs.37.5 lac through NRE a/c of R.P.Modani in the guise of `gift , by using facility of signed blank cheques in possession of Umesh Bangur, accused no.3, who was facilitating placement/layering of proceeds of crime by transferring the funds from this account to different individuals and firms including the accused. Paragraph 2.7 of the complaint reads thus : 2.7 Accused no.7, Asha Lakhotia is wife of Radha Mohan Lakhotia, accused no.6 and real sister of Rajendra Prasad Modani, who had received part of proceeds of -4- crime amount to Rs.12.5 lac through NRE a/c of R.P.Modani in the guise of `gift , by using facility of signed blank cheques in possession of Umesh Bangur, accused no.3, who was facilitating placement/layering of proceeds of crime by transferring the funds from this account to different individuals and firms including the accused. 4 There are specific averments made in the complaint in paragraph 24 which reads thus : 24.As stated earlier, an amount of Rs.8,45,18,975/- was found to have been transferred by Umesh Bangur, accused no.3 using the facility of signed blank cheques to different firms and individuals. Out of the said transfers, the details of funds transferred into the accounts of accused no.4 to 9 from the NRE account of Rajendra Prasad Modani by Umesh Bangur, accused no.3, using the facility of signed blank cheque leaves are as under : Sr.No. Name of the accused Total Amount(Rs.) -5- 1 S.N.Modani,accused no.4 Rs.2,70,00,000/- 2 S.S.Modani,accused no.5 Rs. 50,00,000/- 3 Radha Mohan Lakhotia,accused no.6 Rs. 37,50,000/- 4 Asha Lakhotia,accused no.7 Rs. 12,50,000/- 5 Shantilal Panagria,accused no.8 in the account of M/s.Subh Laxmi Syntex,i.e. Accused no.9 Rs. 90,00,000/- Rs.4,60,00,000/- 5 It is pertinent to note that the complaint was lodged in August 2008. The learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the communication dated 23 rd January 2007 issued by the Superintendent of Narcotic Control Bureau in Mumbai. The said communication dated 23 rd January 2007 records that as on that date the link between the seized 200 kg of cocaine by NCB and the funds transferred from R.P.Modani s account to various individuals/ companies in India could not be established. However, the said communication also records the fact that the concerned authorities in Bankok have been requested to investigate the nature of business undertaken by Mr.R.P.Modani, his antecedents, source of funds transferred to India and whether the amounts were declared to the Tax authorities in Bangkok. Therefore, reliance cannot be placed by the applicants on the said letter dated 23 rd January 2007 which -6- is issued one year prior to the date of filing of complaint when investigation was in progress. 6 The averments made in the complaint make out a case for proceeding against the applicant. Merely because Mr.Modani is not shown as accused is no ground to say that the designated Court could not have proceed against the present applicants. 7 In the circumstances, no fault can be found with the order of the learned Judge of issuing process on the complaint filed by the first respondent. 8 Hence, at this stage, no case is made out for interference. Criminal applications are rejected. 9 It is however made clear that the observations made in this order are for limited purposes of considering the challenge to the order of issue of process. All contentions of the applicants on merits are expressly kept open which can be agitated by the applicants at the appropriate stage of proceedings. -7- JUDGE