Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Deepa Heda vs Union Of India on 23 April, 2018
Author: Pankaj Bhandari
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail No. 4619/2018
Deepa Heda W/o Shivcharan Heda, R/o 25/30, Kawa Kheda,
Main Road, Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India Through Sitaram Meena, Assistant Director,
Enforcement Directorate, Second Floor, Life Fund-Ii, Life
Insurance Corporation Building, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Yogesh Singhal
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Anand Sharma for Union of India
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
Judgment / Order
23/04/2018
1. Petitioner has filed this bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
2. Criminal Complaint No.1/2017 was registered at Special Sessions Judge, Jaipur (Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 for offence under Section 45 (1) of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
3. It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is that out of money laundered she has purchased residential and agriculture property in Bhilwara. It is contended that petitioner is a femal and there is special provision under Section 45 of the Act with regard to females. It is also contended that the properties have been attached by the Department. Custodial interrogation is not required as complaint has already been filed and petitioner has (2 of 2) [CRLMB-4619/2018] been summoned by non-bailable warrant vide order dated 23.2.2018.
4. Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has opposed the bail application. His contention is that petitioner alongwith her husband were instrumental in money laundering to the the tune of Rs.1.39 crores.
5. I have considered the contentions.
6. Considering the contentions put-forth by the counsel for the petitioner and the fact that complaint has been filed and property had already been attached and the custodial interrogation of petitioner is not required, I am inclined to allow the anticipatory bail.
7. The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the concerned Court within two weeks of this order. The concerned Court shall enlarge the petitioner on bail as per bail bonds deemed proper by the concerned Court.
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J Teekam/46