Kerala HC Denies Bail To Former CPI Leader N Bhasurangan & His Son In Cheating And Money Laundering Case
|The Kerala High Court denied bail to former CPI leader N. Bhasurangan in alleged cheating and money laundering case. He was accused of committing financial irregularities while being President of Kandala Service Cooperative Bank.
The Court also denied bail to his 28-year-old son who was the secretary of the bank.
The Court was hearing a bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the father-son duo in a Crime case registered by the Enforcement Directorate against six accused persons for allegedly committing the offence under Section 3 and punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
The bench of Justice CS Dias observed, “…there are reasonable grounds to hold that the petitioners have committed the above offence and that they are likely to commit the offences if they are enlarged on bail, I am of the definite view that the petitioners are not entitled to be released on bail at this stage.”
Advocate PT Jose appeared for the Appellant and Advocate Jaishankar V Nair appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
The prosecution case arose from multiple complaints filed by the police against all the accused which led to the filing of several criminal cases against the President and Secretary of the Kandala Service Co-operative Bank. Both the accused persons were charged under Section 420 of the IPC for allegedly cheating depositors by accepting money with the promise of high interest and then failing to return the funds. The Petitioners applied for bail and argued that their detention served no further purpose, as they have no prior criminal records, and some co-accused have already been granted bail. They claimed they did not directly collect or misappropriate the funds. The Petitioners asserted that the complaint lacks legal grounds and should be quashed.
The Court mentioned the Supreme Court decision in Directorate of Enforcement v. Aditya Tripathi (2023) where according to the Court it was held, “merely because for a chargesheet has been filed, it cannot be a ground to release the accused on bail in connection with the scheduled offences under the Act. Investigation for the predicated offences and the investigation by the Enforcement Directorate for the scheduled offences under the PML Act are different and distinct.”
The Court further mentioned the Supreme Court decision in Himanshu Chandravadan Desai v. State of Gujarat (2005), which according to the Court bears similarities to the present case. The Court noted that the Supreme Court declined to enlarge the accused on bail considering the huge amount involved in the systematic fraud and apprehending the danger of the appellants attempting to tamper with the evidence by pressuring the witnesses.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Petition.
Cause Title: N Bhasurangan v. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement (Neutral Citation: 2024:KER:71204)
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates PT Jose and PV Baby
Respondent: SC Jaishankar V. Nair