Himachal Pradesh High Court
Reserved On : 01.08.2025 vs Enforcement Directorate Office (Ed) on 4 August, 2025
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Virender Singh
1 2025:HHC:25800 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CrMP(M) No. : 1848 of 2025 Reserved on : 01.08.2025 Decided on : 04.08.2025 Hitesh Gandhi ...Applicant Versus Enforcement Directorate Office (ED) ...Respondent Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant : Mr. Jyotirmay Bhatt, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Advocate (through Video Conferencing) with Mr. Ajeet Singh Saklani, Mr. Pranjal Tripathi, Ms. Ilma Khan and Ms. Ananya Srivastava, Advocates.
Virender Singh, Judge.
Applicant-Hitesh Gandhi, has filed the present application, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS'), with a prayer to extend the interim bail, granted to him, by this Court, vide order, dated 8th July, 2025, while deciding CrMP (M) No. 1522 of 2025.
1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
2 2025:HHC:25800
2. The extension of the interim bail has mainly been sought, on the grounds, which are contained in para 22 of the application, and are reproduced, as under:
"That the Petitioner respectfully seeks an extension of the interim bail previously granted by this Hon'ble Court, which was initially issued to enable him to manage his business affairs and to secure an educational loan for his daughter's higher studies. The Petitioner now seeks further extension on additional and compelling grounds. He is currently suffering from a serious kidney-related ailment requiring continuous medical supervision, regular treatment, and hospital visits, without which his health may deteriorate significantly. Furthermore, the Petitioner has recently received a Letter of Intent (LOI) from Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited for the establishment of a petrol pump. In order to proceed with this opportunity, he is required to obtain multiple No Objection Certificates (NOCs) and approvals from various authorities including the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), Forest Department, Tehsildar, Punjab Public Works Department (PPWD), Punjab State Power Corporation Limited Sub-
Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Punjab Police, and the Department of Food and Civil Supplies, Punjab. These processes are time- bound and require the Petitioner's personal presence and active involvement. In light of the above circumstances - both medical and administrative - the Petitioner humbly prays for the gracious extension of interim bail in the interest of justice and equity. The medical reports of the Petitioner are being attached herewith as Annexure p-12 and the Letter of Intent issued by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited is being annexed as Annexure P-13."
3 2025:HHC:25800
3. When put to notice, the prayer for extension of bail has been opposed by the Enforcement Directorate (hereinafter referred to as 'ED'), on the ground, that the application for extension of bail sans merit and the same is liable to be dismissed, as, the applicant has approached this Court with successive interim bail applications, on vague grounds, which is stated to be misuse of law.
4. The medical ground, upon which, the extension of the interim bail, has been sought, has also been challenged by pleading that the medical condition of the applicant is neither emergent nor incapacitating to such an extent that it necessitates release of the applicant on interim bail.
5. Highlighting the fact that the regular bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court, as well as, by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it has been pleaded that the instant application is not maintainable, as, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide order, dated 25th March, 2025, has granted liberty to the applicant to revive the prayer for bail, before the Special 4 2025:HHC:25800 Court/trial Court, after the expiry of a period of six months.
6. The extension of interim bail has also been challenged on the ground that the mandatory twin conditions, under Section 45 of the PMLA are applicable, even, while considering the interim bail.
7. The prayer, made in the application, has also been opposed on the ground that every sickness does not ipso facto entitle the accused (applicant) for medical bail.
8. A contention has also been made on behalf of the ED that in order to evaluate the medical condition of the applicant, a Medical Board may kindly be constituted, by nominating the Doctors of Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital or AIIMS.
9. Apart from this the factual matrix of the case has also been re-iterated in order to demonstrate that the applicant is prime accused, in the case, as such, not entitled to the relief, as claimed, in the application.
10. In order to buttress his contentions, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the ED has relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal 5 2025:HHC:25800 Chaudhary vs. Union of India, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929; Pawan alias Tamatar vs. Ramprakash Pandey, (2002) 9 SCC 166; State of U.P. vs. Gayatri Prasad Prajapati, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 843; order dated 03.11.2022 in Criminal Appeal No. 701/2020, titled as Directorate of Enforcement vs. Kapil Wadhawan; judgments/orders of Delhi High Court in Athar Pervez vs. State, Crl. Ref No. 1 of 2015; Directorate of Enforcement vs. Raj Singh Gehlot, Crl.MC. 3713/2022; Kewal krishna Kumar vs. Enforcement Directorate, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 1547; Sameer Mahendru vs. Directorate of Enforcement, Bail Appl. No. 1343/2023; order dated 05.06.2023 in Bail Application No. 3807/2022, titled Sanjay Jain vs. Directorate of Enforcement; order dated 12.04.2023 in Crl.M.C. 6638 of 2022, titled Kanwar Deep Singh vs. Directorate of Enforcement; order dated 27.08.2023, in Bail Appln. No. 2093/2023, titled Amandeep Dhall vs. Directorate of Enforcement; order dated 25.02.2025 in Bail Appln. 544/2025,titled Arvind Dham vs. Directorate of Enforcement; judgments/orders of Bombay High Court in Mehandra Maniklal Shah vs. Rashmikant Mansukhlal 6 2025:HHC:25800 Shah & Anr., (2009) SCC Online Bom 2095; State of Maharashtra vs. Vinod Sabaji Loke, 1996 SCC OnLine Bom 388; and judgment of High Court of J & K in State vs. Sardool Singh, 1975 SCC OnLine 27.
11. On all these submissions, a prayer has been made to dismiss the instant application.
12. In the present case, the ED has initiated the proceedings, against the applicant, in a case, which revolves around a scam, involving the allocation of scholarships to SC, ST and OBC students, under the Post Matric Scheme. In this fraudulent activity, officials from the Department of Higher Education, alongwith private Educational Institutions and Banks, were involved, which has resulted into misappropriation of scholarship funds of more than ₹ 200 crore.
13. The applicant, according to the stand taken by ED, alongwith others, has played a major role in the scam, wrongfully withholding the rightful scholarship entitlement of the scholarships of the students, belonging to SC, ST and OBC students of Himachal Pradesh. According to ED, they have diverted the said funds into their 7 2025:HHC:25800 pockets/accounts. 22 institutions are stated to be involved. In this regard, ED has relied upon the charge sheet submitted by CBI. The investigation is stated to be going on to unearth the illicit money and ascertain the proceeds of crime (PoC), obtained by way of this scam.
14. After recording the reason to believe in writing, the applicant and his co-accused were arrested by ED on 30th August, 2023, under Section 19 of PMLA, in the said ECIR. Thereafter, they were produced before the Special Designated Court (PMLA), Shimla, on 31 st August, 2023, and the learned Special Court, after perusal of all the documents, including the arrest memo, grounds of arrest, reasons to believe and material for formation of such belief, has granted five days' ED custody, with a direction, to produce the accused persons before the Special Court on 4th September, 2023, on which date, they were produced before the Special Court and were remanded to judicial custody.
15. As per the stand of the ED, the offences, under the PMLA, are different offences, as such, constitute class 8 2025:HHC:25800 apart and need to be dealt with different approach, in the matter of bail.
16. As per the case set up by the ED, CBI registered FIR No. RC0962019S0002, dated 7th May, 2019, under Sections 409, 419, 465, 466 and 471 IPC, against the unknown persons. As per the allegations of the said case, there were complicity of individuals from State Government Education Department, Bank Officials and private institutions. Misappropriation in the disbursement of scholarship funds, in large scale, has also been alleged. The offences, under Sections 419 and 471 IPC, are also stated to be scheduled offences, mentioned in the schedule, appended to PMLA and as such, inquiry was initiated.
17. The applicant is stated to be the Vice Chairman of KC Group of Institutions at Pandoga, Una and Nawashehar, Punjab. According to the ED, during the course of investigation, it has been revealed that KC Group of Institutions, Pandoga and Nawashehar, in connivance with the officials of Directorate of Higher Education, Himachal Pradesh and Bank officials, have fraudulently 9 2025:HHC:25800 availed the scholarship, under the Post Matric Scheme, for SC/ST/OBC of Himachal Pradesh.
18. According to the ED, the applicant has verified and claimed the scholarship under Post Matric Scheme, for the students, belonging to SC/ST/OBC, who were not enrolled in any course, with KC Group of Institutions Pandoga and who had left the institute without completing their studies. In order to grab more and more scholarship, false details of students were uploaded on scholarship portal, by changing the course of study in subsequent years, by changing the caste category of students and by showing the students as hosteler, instead of day scholars. Such false details were verified by the staff of KC Group of Institutions Pandoga and scholarship was claimed from the Directorate of Higher Education.
19. The applicant is alleged to have supervised the entire work related to admission and claim of scholarship, under Post Matric Scheme, for SC/St/OBC students of Himachal Pradesh of KC Group of Institutions, Pandoga and Nawashehar. According to the ED, the applicant was joint account holder in bank accounts, alongwith his father 10 2025:HHC:25800 Prem Pal Gandhi, in which, illegally obtained scholarship amount got transferred from the bank accounts of the students.
20. It is the further allegation of the ED that the applicant, so far has obtained proceeds of crime to the tune of ₹ 4.42 crore, through KC Group of Institutions, Pandoga.
21. According to the further stand of ED, searches, under Section 17 of PMLA was conducted at 24 locations, including the residential premises of the applicant. After completion of search, the summons, under Section 50 of PMLA, were served upon him, for appearing before the authorized officer at Zonal Office of Directorate of Enforcement at Chandigarh, pursuant to which, the applicant appeared before the Directorate of Enforcement at Zonal Office, Chandigarh. After recording his statement and the reasons to believe, in writing, on the basis of material in possession, the applicant was arrested, under Section 19 of PMLA, on 30th August, 2023, at 09.24 a.m. According to ED, before his arrest, the applicant was informed about the grounds of his arrest, in writing. The 11 2025:HHC:25800 applicant not only read the grounds of arrest, but, also signed each page of grounds of arrest in token of having read the same.
22. It is the further stand of the ED that the investigation conducted had revealed hat the applicant, through KC Group of Institutions at Pandoga and Nawashehar had obtained scholarship to the tune of ₹ 14,92,37,220/- illegally and fraudulently, in connivance with the officials of Directorate of Higher Education, Himachal Pradesh and the bank officials. This amount is stated to have been obtained by the applicant as a result of criminal activity of cheating and making false claims of students to obtain scholarship under Post Matric Scheme, in criminal conspiracy with public servant, between the years 2013-14 to 2017-18.
23. According to the ED, after his arrest, the father of the applicant was informed about the arrest over call through mobile phone. The averment of the applicant that he was arrested from Nawashehar and neither the grounds of arrest nor the arrest order were supplied to him is stated to be baseless, as he was produced before the 12 2025:HHC:25800 learned Special Court PMLA on 31st August, 2023 and the said Court, after careful examination of the material available on record, granted five days' ED custody to the applicant.
24. The applicant has been arrested on 29 th August, 2023. Till date, charges have not yet been framed, as, only the cognizance has been taken by the learned trial Court.
25. First of all, coming to the arguments of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the ED, qua the fact that the rigors of Section 45 of the PMLA are also applicable to the interim bail. In this regard, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the ED has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and others versus Union of India and others, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929, especially on para 412 of the judgment, which reads as under:
"412. As a result, we have no hesitation in observing that in whatever form the relief is couched including the nature of proceedings, be it under Section 438 of the 1973 Code or for that matter, by invoking the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court, the underlying principles and rigors of Section 454 of the 2002 must come into play and without exception ought to be reckoned to uphold the objectives of the 13 2025:HHC:25800 2002 Act, which is a special legislation providing for stringent regulatory measures for combating the menace of money- laundering."
26. With due respect to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in this case, the learned counsel appearing for the ED, could not satisfy the judicial conscience of this Court, as to how, the above decision is applicable, to the facts and circumstances of the present case, wherein, a prayer for extension of interim bail, has been sought. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the said case, has specifically held that in whatever form the relief is couched, including the nature of proceedings, be it under Section 438 of the 1973 Code or for that matter, by invoking the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court, the rigors of Section 45 of the 2002 Act would come into play. Hence, no benefit can be derived, on the basis of the said decision.
27. Having given a thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the ED and the case law, relied upon by him, with due respect to the law laid down in the judgments/orders, relied upon on 14 2025:HHC:25800 behalf of the ED, to the considered opinion of this Court, the same, are not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case.
28. The objections, so raised, by the learned counsel appearing for the ED, are also liable to be ignored, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 2787 of 2024, titled as Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh versus State of Maharashtra and Another, Neutral Citation No. 2024 INSC 645, as, the trial, in the present case, has not yet commenced.
29. Moreover, the interim bail does not fall within the definition of regular bail or bail, granted under Section 438 of the CrPC/482 of the BNSS.
30. Even otherwise, the order, the extension of which has been sought by the applicant, has not been assailed by the ED. Also, there is no averment in the reply that the earlier relief of interim bail, granted to the applicant, has been misused by him, in any manner.
31. Now, coming to the prayer, upon which, the extension of bail, for 42 days, has been made, the applicant has already availed the relief of interim bail and 15 2025:HHC:25800 the grounds, upon which, the extension has been sought, this Court is not inclined to accept the prayer, for extension of the interim bail, for 42 days, as, the same amounts to granting the relief of regular bail, however, considering the ailment, as mentioned in the document, Annexure P-12, i.e. AML in left kidney (Renal Angiomyolipoma), this Court is of the view that the applicant is able to make out a case for extension of interim bail for ten days to get himself medically checked- up.
32. So far as the another ground, with regard to the issuance of the Letter of Intent, dated 11 th November, 2024, is concerned, sufficient time has been given to the applicant to fulfill such requirement, as mentioned in the said letter.
33. Consequently, the application is partly allowed and the interim bail, granted to the applicant, vide order, dated 8th July, 2025, which is going to expire on 4 th August, 2025, is extended up to 14 th August, 2025, on the same terms and conditions. The requisite bail bonds, which were furnished earlier, by the applicant, before the 16 2025:HHC:25800 learned trial Court, are ordered to be extended till 14th August, 2025, on the same terms and conditions.
34. The applicant is directed to surrender before the jail authorities, on 14th August, 2025, positively by 05.00 p.m.
35. Needless to observe that the applicant shall not seek any exemption to appear before the learned trial Court, on the date(s) fixed, if any, in the trial, during the period of interim bail.
36. Any of the observations, made hereinabove, shall not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case, as, these observations, are confined, only, to the disposal of the present bail application.
37. It is made clear that respondent-ED would be at liberty to move appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions, is found to be violated, by the applicant.
38. Registry is directed to forward a soft copy of the bail order to the Superintendent of District Jail Kaithu, Shimla, through e-mail, with a direction to enter the date 17 2025:HHC:25800 of grant of interim bail in the e-prison software, as well as, to the learned trial Court, forthwith.
( Virender Singh )
Judge
August 04, 2025
( rajni )
Digitally signed
by RAJNI
RAJNI Date: 2025.08.04
11:58:14 +0530