Money Laundering Case- Former Punjab MLA And Congress Leader Sukhpal Khaira Granted Bail By P&H High Court

The Bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur was of the opinion that at this stage, it can't be concluded that the Khaira has committed the offence under the PML Act.

"Any prima facie conclusion cannot be become formed, qua the inculpation of Khaira, either in the scheduled offence (NDPS Act), or in the offence under the PML Act," the Court added.

This observation came from the bench when the Directorate of Enforcement argued before the Court that as per the requirement under Section 45 of the PML Act, unless the Court makes an objective satisfaction, that there are reasonable grounds of believing, that he is not guilty of such offence, and, that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, he can't be granted bail.

The facts in brief

An FIR was registered in the matter regarding smuggling of heroin, gold, and, illegal weapons and in October 2017, the Additional Sessions Judge, Fazilka convicted 9 persons in connection with the case.

The Lower Court also allowed a 319 CrPC [Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence] application to add Khaira, among others as accused in the FIR.

Against this, a revision petition was moved in the High Court, however, the same was dismissed and the investigating agency was given the liberty to file a supplementary charge sheet against the additional accused concerned if so advised.

Against the order of the High Court, an SLP was preferred before the Supreme Court, wherein, the Apex Court ordered for a stay of proceedings before the trial court concerned. This order of stay by the Supreme Court has not been vacated.

Thereafter, the Supreme Court, in connection with this very case, formulated certain questions as to when and at which stage, section 319 CrPC Powers can be exercised. The questions have not yet been answered by a Bench of the Apex Court, larger in strength, than the one formulating them.

"The effect of till date no answers, being meted by the Hon'ble Apex Court, to the above formulated substantial questions of law, is that, the concurrent affirmative verdicts, drawn on the prosecution application cast under Section 319 Cr.P.C., rather bringing the inevitable consequence of the trial, against the bail applicant-petitioner, and, others, as arises from FIR No. 35 of 5.3.2015, cannot being permitted to commence," the High Court noted.

Therefore, the High Court held that at this stage, no firm conclusion can be formed, that the bail applicant along with other co-accused, as, named in the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., has prima facie committed the scheduled or the predicate offence

"Therefore, also prima facie, at this stage, the bail applicant is not an offender in the predicate offence, and, nor qua the offence constituted in the PML Act, emphasizingly when there is an interlink inter se both. Moreover also, as stated above, upon the convicts' concerned conviction becoming set aside, thereupon, prima facie, there may be no occasion for the bail applicant-petitioner, for his being tried along with others, nor also there may be any permissible re-opening of trial, against the bail applicant-petitioner along with other convicts, vis-a-vis charges, as arise from FIR No. 35 of 5.3.2015," the Court further added.

Lastly, noting that no evidence has been adduced, at this stage, by the prosecution, that in the event of grant of bail to the bail applicant-petitioner, there is any likelihood of his fleeing from justice, and, tampering with the prosecution evidence, the Court granted him bail.

He has been asked to furnish personal and surety bonds, in the sum of Rs. 5.00 lacs, with one or two solvent local sureties in the like amount, before, and, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court concerned.

Case title - Sukhpal Singh Khaira v. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 12

Click Here To Read/Download Order