LIFE Mission Case| M Sivasankar Was Kingpin Who Orchestrated Money Laundering Since Beginning; ASGI Tells Kerala HC

The Additional Solicitor General R. Sankaranarayanan told the Kerala High Court on Tuesday that the former Principal Secretary to the Chief Minister of Kerala, M Sivasankar, is the kingpin, who orchestrated the money laundering and bribery since the very beginning, and that he could impede the investigation if released on bail. 

The Single Judge Bench of Justice A. Badharudeen was considering the bail application moved by Sivasankar in the money laundering case related to alleged corruption in the LIFE (Livelihood, Inclusion and Financial Empowerment) Mission project, a housing project of the Kerala Government for the homeless.

The ASG told the Court today that there were three different offences involved - the first regarding gold smuggling, the second relating to the bribery, and the third pertaining to a portion of bribe being converted into foreign currency, and taken by diplomatic channel to a foreign country - and that accordingly, it was not the same set of facts involved.

To this, the Court today pointedly said that the question that had to be decided by it, as had been pointed out by the Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta on behalf of the petitioner, was whether two ECIRs could be registered on the same set of facts. 

To this, the ASG replied, "The facts required to to prove gold smuggling completely different from facts required to prove bribery. It is a completely independent transaction". 

Through the Objection filed by the Retainer Counsel for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) Jaishankar V. Nair, on behalf of itself and the Central Government, it is submitted that the contract had been decided in favour of M/s. Unitac Builders and Developers of Santhosh Eappen. It was also alleged that Swapna Suresh had also admitted that an upfront commission as bribe had been demanded by Sivasankar and other Consulate Officials, and which had been paid by Eappen after receiving the amount from Red Crescent. 

It was contended that it was upon the directions of Sivasankar that P. Venugopal, CA had assisted Suresh in opening of locker jointly in their names, wherein part of the proceeds of crime generated out of commission of scheduled offence was kept. It was submitted that the petitioner was also evasive in responding to the same when the details were sought. 

It has been averred that for registration of a crime under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), the only necessity is registration of a Predicate / Scheduled Offence prior to it. It is also submitted that the investigation done by ED under the provisions of PMLA is independent of the investigation being conducted by any predicate agency. It is contended that since Sivasankar had not been arrested in the scheduled offence, there would not be any immunity to him from the proceedings under the PMLA, 2002.

It has also been averred that the present case is different from that recorded by the ED as ECIR No. KCZO/31/2020 in relation to gold smuggling through diplomatic channels. It has been stressed that in this case, the allegations against Sivasankar is rooted to the kickbacks received from Eappen. 

Additionally, it has been pointed out that the present bail application of Sivasankar also does not qualify the twin qualifications for grant of bail that have been stipulated under Section 45 of the PMLA. It has been submitted that the exemption granted under Section 45 is applicable only to those who are terminally sick, which is not the case herein. Submissions regarding the health condition of the petitioner were  countered by the counsels, stating that he did not suffer from any serious health issues curtailing his mobility.

It was averred that as the entire proceeds of crime remained to be traced, and considering that the petitioner had retired, the chances of him fleeing the process or directly or indirectly inducing, threat or promise to any person could not be overlooked. It was also stressed that as the petitioner is a highly influential person closely associated with the Kerala Government, granting him bail at this juncture, could lead to tampering with the evidence and influencing other witnesses. 

Highlighting these grounds amongst the others, the ASGI prayed that bail not be granted to Sivasankar. 

The Case has been posted tomorrow for further consideration. 

Case Title: M. Sivasankar v. Union of India