‘Presence Of Stent Due To Heart Ailment Very Common In World, Cannot Be Ground Of Exemption Under Section 205 Of CrPC’: Jharkhand High Court

Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi held, “The petition under section 205 of Cr.P.C. meant for a bonafide person to abide by the law of the country not like this petitioner as he is already a flight risk. Moreover this petitioner is having some heart ailment wherein stunt has been put in his heart. Nowadays that is very common in the entire world and that cannot be ground of exemption under section 205 of Cr.P.C. Further the petitioner is a man of means and even if he is looking after his father, mother, he can make an alternative arrangement and that can not be a ground of 205 Cr.P.C.”

“The conditions as embodied under section 45 of the Act will have to be complied even in respect of application for bail made under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. There are allegations against this petitioner of laundering a huge amount of money which has come in the investigation and it has been elaborately discussed therein,” the court added.

The court was hearing an appeal filed by Rajeev Jhawar, the Managing Director of Usha Martin Limited, against rejection of application filed under section 205 of CrPC in a money laundering case under section 3 of PMLA Act punishable under section 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

The bench also noted that the trial court, while rejecting the petition filed by the petitioner, has held that he has not cooperated in the investigation and has left the country and not appeared for bail but filled Section 205 of Cr.P.C. petition.

"Invoking the powers under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is untenable especially in a case of this nature, wherein serious allegations are made against the petitioner (accused). If such a privilege is given to an accused in a case of this nature, people will lose their confidence in the administration of justice," said the court.

The court said the standard expectation is for the accused to be present in court, with section 205 granting magistrates the discretion to permit the accused's representation by a pleader instead. The accused must establish valid reasons to be exempted from personal appearance to avail the benefits of section 205 of the Criminal Procedure Code, said the court.

“Nor can it be said that a man is physically unable to attend the court simply because he is 58 or 60 years old. Nor would the mere fact of absence from the place of occurrence furnish sufficient ground for exemption from personal appearance as many conspirators who work behind the scene can very well claim exemption on this ground. Similarly mere ground of social position is not enough to meet out a differential treatment to a person,” Justice Dwivedi further opined.

The court said that in cases involving serious allegations, granting an exemption for initial appearance would convey a misleading message to society. 

"According to the petitioner he is Managing Director of the Usha Martin Limited and he has cooperated in the investigation and for that he may be exempted and only for that position he would not be entitled for any special privilege when he is brought before a Court of law as an accused. The statutory mandate is over and above all the superiority, the accused possesses or claims to have by virtue of his position," it added.

Case Title: Rajeev Jhawar Versus Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 24

Case No.: W.P.(Cr.) No. 136 of 2023

Counsels for the Petitioner : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Advocate Mr. Rajiv Bhatnagar, Advocate Mr. Ranjit Kushwaha, Advocate Mr. Anshuman Mohit Chaturvedi, Advocate

Counsels for the E.D. : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment