Central Court Ruling on Money Laundering Investigation and Exoneration

A Special Court in Ranchi has ruled that even if a suspect is cleared by the police in a prior offense that triggers a money laundering investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), it is ultimately the court’s decision to drop charges under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

This decision was made by Special Judge Prabhat Kumar Sharma on November 26, when he denied bail to Pankaj Mishra, the representative of the Jharkhand Chief Minister, who has been in custody since being arrested by the ED. The order was posted on the official website on Tuesday.

Jharkhand Police had cleared Mishra of several FIRs, including a threatening case related to the Barharwa toll plaza bidding process, which led to the ED investigation.

The case at Barharwa was filed based on a complaint by Sambhu Nandan Kumar, who claimed that Mishra threatened him on June 22, 2020, regarding the bidding process. Despite Kumar’s refusal to withdraw from the bidding, he was allegedly attacked by a mob at Mishra’s direction.

In May of this year, Jharkhand Police filed a charge sheet against eight defendants in the case, clearing Mishra and Minister Alamgir Alam of any involvement.

The defense argued in the bail application that a person cannot be prosecuted under the PMLA if they were not prosecuted in the predicate offense.

The ED’s special public prosecutor countered by stating that Mishra wields political influence and can manipulate legal cases with the help of political connections.

The ED also revealed that Mishra has been using a mobile phone while in custody at Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences (RIMS) in Ranchi, making around 300 calls to various individuals, including influential figures.

After considering both arguments, the Special Judge found it unconvincing to grant bail to the accused due to his exoneration from the predicate offense. The court emphasized that just because Mishra was not prosecuted for the predicate offense, his prosecution for money laundering is not necessarily illegal, as evidence shows his active involvement in the crime.