'ED Conviction Rate Is Poor, How Long Accused Can Be Kept Undertrial?': Supreme Court Asks In Ex-WB Minister Partha Chatterjee's Bail Plea

While hearing the bail petition of former West Bengal Education Minister Partha Chatterjee in a money laundering case, the Supreme Court on Wednesday (November 26) expressed concerns about keeping an accused under custody for a long period without trial.A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing the petition filed by Chatterjee seeking bail in the money laundering case arising out of the bribery allegations in the recruitment of Assistant Primary Teachers in West Bengal.During the hearing, the bench also flagged the low conviction rates in the cases prosecuted by the Enforcement Directorate. Though the bench expressed an inclination to grant bail, the hearing was ultimately adjourned till Monday (December 2) to get more details about the custody undergone by Chatterjee in the connected CBI cases.Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, for Chatterjee, submitted that he has been under custody for over 2.5 years since his arrest on July 23, 2022. Highlighting that the petitioner was aged 73 years, Rohatgi submitted that there was no likelihood of an early completion trial, given that there are 183 witnesses and four supplementary prosecution complaints.Rohatgi submitted that the petitioner has already undergone more than 1/3rd of the maximum punishment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, which is 7 years imprisonment. He placed reliance on Section 479 of the BNSS 2023(which provides bail to undertrials after serving 1/3rd of the maximum sentence) and the judgment in Najeeb case(which held that bail can be granted when there is prolonged incarceration)"Every other individual granted bail...lady from whose house money was recovered and who named the petitioner was granted bail 2 days ago...no recovery made from him," Rohatgi submitted. "You are not going to keep money at your residence," Justice Kant remarked before asking Additional Solicitor General SV Raju(for the Enforcement Directorate) about the status of the trial.ASG Raju highlighted the gravity of the crime by saying that a major scam was going on whereby jobs were being offered to undeserving candidates based on bribes. There was "rampant corruption" affecting more than 50,000 candidates. The co-accused Arpita Mukherjee has given a statement that the money belonged to the petitioner, ASG argued, adding that there are four predicate offences. He further argued that Section 479 BNSS was not applicable to him given the gravity of the crime.The bench however expressed concerns about the delay in the commencement of trial. "How long can we keep him? That is the question. Here is a case where more than 2 years have gone. How to strike a balance in such a case?," Justice Kant asked."Mr Raju, if ultimately he is not convicted, what will happen? Waiting for 2.5-3 years is not a small period!" Justice Bhuyan asked. Justice Bhuyan also commented on the low conviction rates in ED cases."What is your conviction rate? If it is 60-70%, we can understand. But it is very poor," Justice Bhuyan said. ASG replied that the matter has to be seen on a case-to-case basis.When Justice Kant asked what would be the impediment created by the petitioner if he was given the relief. ASG replied that he might exert pressure to make the witnesses retract their statements. "Arpita has said that she is fearful of him," ASG said. Justice Kant however asked what was the evidentiary value of the statement of Arpita who was a co-accused.When the ASG argued that the petitioner was an influential person who has even manipulated doctors to get favourable medical certificates, Rohatgi refuted by saying that he was no longer a Minister. Rohatgi claimed that the only evidence against him was the statements recorded by the ED officials under Section 50 PMLA. He placed heavy reliance on the recent judgment granting bail to Tamil Nadu Minister Senthil Balaji.The bench expressed that interim bail can be granted on an experimental basis to see the progress of the trial.As the bench started dictating the order, ASG submitted that Chatterjee was under the CBI custody in the predicate offence.Rohatgi further submitted that the timing of the CBI arrest, which was done on October 1, 2024, when the bail application was pending in the Supreme Court, was really suspicious, as it was done over two years after the registration of the predicate offence. ASG Raju refuted the argument saying that this was the second CBI arrest and he was arrested earlier by the CBI in October 2022.When Rohatgi submitted that the CBI arrest was mala fide, Justice Kant said, "Mr.Rohatgi, everything can't be malafide, when money was coming out of your house." Rohatgi pointed out that the CBI had not arrested him for 28 months. "If CBI had arrested on that day, you would have said, look at the tearing hurry. When they take their own time, you say..." Justice Kant said. Rohatgi asserted that the timing of the arrest was "suspect."At this juncture, the bench sought to know the details regarding the CBI...

'ED Conviction Rate Is Poor, How Long Accused Can Be Kept Undertrial?': Supreme Court Asks In Ex-WB Minister Partha Chatterjee's Bail Plea

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags