E-Paper
Money laundering case: Punjab and Haryana high court refuses to release M3M directors
While dismissing their pleas, the Punjab and Haryana high court bench of justice Ritu Bahri and justice Manisha Batra also asked the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to submit a status report on the case by August 22.
The Punjab and Haryana high court has refused to release Basant Bansal and Pankaj Bansal, the directors of M3M, a Gurugram-based real estate group, who are behind bars in connection with a money laundering case connected to a former CBI judge in Panchkula.
While dismissing their pleas, the high court bench of justice Ritu Bahri and justice Manisha Batra also asked the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to submit a status report on the case by August 22.
“…it has been revealed that the allegations as levelled against judicial officer namely, Sudhir Parmar (former CBI judge, Panchkula), who is alleged to have taken undue favours from the present petitioners and other key persons of M3M group of companies and managing director of IREO company are being investigated by ED. The same is quite serious in nature. Keeping in view the gravity of the matter, the prayer as made by the petitioners for grant of release from custody at this stage does not deserve to be accepted,” the high court bench observed.
Basant and Pankaj Bansal, arrested by the ED in June had sought quashing of orders from Panchkula special court, whereby they were ordered to be given to ED and subsequently sent to judicial custody. They had also demanded that Section 19 (1) of PMLA, which empowers ED officers to arrest a person, be declared as unconstitutional.
The court observed that the vires of Section 19 had been upheld by Supreme Court. The court took note of ED’s counsel that even though a review against the judgment is pending. But merely because of the fact that a review petition is pending, the precedential value of judgment would not be destroyed or diminished, it said.
The court further added that a perusal of trial court orders on detention to ED and subsequent order of judicial custody, the petitioners had been validly remanded to custody by passing detailed orders. “The act of directing remand of an accused is a judicial function. The orders of remand passed by the special court/additional sessions judge on duty reveal that the merits of the matter as well as the question whether the detention of the petitioners was justified or not, had been dealt with while remanding them to custody,” it said adding that it was not open to the petitioners to challenge correctness of these orders at this stage.
On April 17, Haryana anti-corruption bureau (ACB) registered a case under Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act against Parmar for allegedly favouring Roop and Basant Bansal. Parmar, who was placed under suspension on April 27 by the high court, was the presiding judge of the special CBI and PMLA court at Panchkula.
Based on the ACB FIR, the ED had started investigations under the PMLA Act. ED says a huge amount of money was diverted to M3M group of companies by IREO group after layering of funds and all the companies through which funds were routed by IREO group to M3M group were shell companies owned/controlled/managed by M3M group and its controller only. IREO group owner, Lalit Goyal was arrested in 2021, and is accused of sending a huge amount of money abroad. As per ED, probe suggests Lalit Goyal, Roop and Basant Bansal were accused before CBI court, Panchkula, and had “bribed” Parmar, CBI judge and his nephew, Ajay Parmar, by “giving undue favours to them and in order to seek favourable orders” from the CBI court in respect of the previous FIR in which the duo and Goyal were cited as accused.
