Probe of offence under Prevention of Money Laundering Act an intricate exercise of 'skills and patience': Delhi Court

Investigation of an offence under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in itself is an intricate exercise of skills and patience, observed a Delhi court on Thursday as it remanded Ambience mall owner Raj Singh Gehlot to the custody of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) till August 7, 2021 [Directorate of Enforcement v. Raj Singh Gehlot]..Additional Sessions Judge Dharmender Rana also pointed out in the order that in the present case, voluminous data is still required to be analysed and numerous statements of witnesses recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA are required to be confronted with the accused..“Investigation of an offence under PMLA in itself is an intricate exercise of skills and patience. The very nature of offence requires sustained interrogation and an intensive analysis of the copious material collected during the course of investigation,” the Court underscored.Further, the Court was of the opinion that due to its intricate nature, a PMLA investigation “for obvious reasons” was a time-consuming process.The Court, therefore, held, “I am of the considered opinion that the investigating agency in a PMLA case deserves a little more time in comparison to the time required in investigating an ordinary crime.”Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa had opposed further extension of remand submitting that the reasons cited by the investigating agency were not tenable. He argued that the grounds were very basic in nature and stated that there was a repetition of the grounds that were cited by the ED seeking remand on July 29, 2021.“Unless there are very strong and exceptional circumstances for extension of ED remand, the ED remand cannot be extended. Extension of ED remand any further in the matter shall be violative of Article 20 and 21 of Constitution of India,” he stressed.The senior counsel also argued that the ED had all the powers. “They can issue letter to anyone in the country, but in the seven days they couldn’t confront me with the documents? They can’t say I am not cooperating,” he said.“I have a Constitutional protections where I can’t be compelled to be a witness. The court had granted seven days already. At the end of the day police has to collect its own material. They can’t compel me,” Pahwa added.ED through Special Public Prosecutor NK Matta had sought an extension of seven more days in its remand plea. Matta had argued that Gehlot was not cooperating and the agency needed more time to interrogate and confront him with documents.On perusing the material produced by the investigating officer, the court said it was satisfied that there was ground for further extension of ED remand. “However, ED is not divested of its onerous responsibility to expeditiously conclude the investigation,” the court remarked. Gehlot was accordingly remanded to ED’s custody till August 7, 2021.Gehlot is accused of allegedly criminally conspiring and siphoning off a loan sanctioned to M/s AHPL by a consortium of banks led by J&K Bank, Ansal Plaza, Delhi for construction of a hotel. It was alleged that he connived with bank officials, defalcated the money and siphoned it off through a complex web of shell companies and his associates. Gehlot is stated to be one of the directors of M/s AHPL.On July 29, the court had remanded him to ED's custody till August 5.[Read Order]