IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER MUMBAI AT MUMBAI

BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2021

IN

P.M.L.A SPECIAL CASE 27 OF 2018

IN

ECIR/01/AZO/2007 & ECIR/01/AZO 2008

Bhanuprasad Trivedi HUF … Applicant/ Accused No.35

Bhanuprasad Ochhaval Trivedi … Applicant/Accused No. 36

v/s

Amrendra Kumar … Respondent/Complainant

INDEX

Sr. No. Particulars Page No.

1. Bail Application
2. Exhibit -A
Order passed by SAT dated 5th July, 2010
 IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER MUMBAI AT MUMBAI

BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2021

IN

P.M.L.A SPECIAL CASE 27 OF 2018

IN

ECIR/01/AZO/2007 & ECIR/01/AZO 2008

Bhanuprasad Trivedi HUF … Applicant/ Accused No.35

Bhanuprasad Ochhaval Trivedi … Applicant/Accused No. 36

v/s

Amrendra Kumar … Respondent/Complainant

IN THE MATTER OF P.M.L.A

SPECIAL CASE 27 OF 2018 FOR
OFFENCES U/S 3, 4 OF THE P.M.L.A.,
2002.
AND
IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATION
FOR BAIL UNDER SECTION 45 OF
THE P.M.L.A., 2002.

HUMBLE APPLICATION FOR BAIL:

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR:

The Applicant above named begs to respectfully submit and pray as follows:

1) The Applicant above-named is a law- abiding and peace-loving citizens

of India and residing at the address mentioned in the cause title, along
with his family members. The Applicant belongs to a respectable family
having deep roots in the society having no criminal antecedents’ or
involving in acts which would attract any legal action

2) The Applicant is arraigned as an accused no 35 and accused no 36 in the

P.M.L.A SPECIAL CASE 27 OF 2018 IN ECIR No.
ECIR/01/AZO/2007 & ECIR/01/AZO 2008, and The Applicant is
 alleged to have committed an offence U/s. 45 of Prevention of Money
Laundering Act 2002 for the offence of Money Laundering under
Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of Prevention of Money
Laundering Act 2002.

3) Brief alleged facts of the prosecution qua the Applicant/Accused is listed

below

4) It is alleged that Securities Board of India (referred as “SEBI”)

conducted investigations into the affairs relating to buying selling and
dealings in the shares of certain companies during their initial Public
Offerings (hereinafter referred to as IPO) covering the years 2003- 2005.

5) It is alleged that investigations prima facie revealed from the preliminary

analysis of the buying selling and dealings in the shares issued through
IPOs of various companies that certain entities had opened a number of
demat accounts and bank accounts which were benami or were in the
name of nonexistent persons or name lenders and they acquired shares of
various companies in their IPOs by making applications in fictitious or
benami names with each of the application being of such a value so as to
make it eligible for allotment under the retail category. These entities
were referred to by SEBI as ‘key operator’ or ‘master account holder’. It
was also observed that subsequent to the allotment of IPOs shares, the
shares from the demat accounts of such fictitious/benami allotees were
transferred to the demat accounts of the key operators/ master account
holders. The key operators subsequently transferred these shares through
off market transactions to ultimate beneficiaries who were allegedly the
financiers of this scheme or arrangement to corner shares from the quota
for retail investors in the IPOs of various companies.

6) It is also alleged that the Applicant was identified as one of the persons
who were involved in the scheme /arrangement for cornering of shares to
the detriment of retail individual investors in the IPO of Infrastructure
Development and Finance Company Ltd. And Sasken Communications
Ltd and a beneficiary of the scheme.
7) It is stated that as per CBI Chargesheet some demat accounts have been
identified as the demat Accounts belonging to the entities who had
provided Finance /Funds to the Key Financier Operators, and it is
alleged thar out of the various financier certain financiers such as the
Applicant herein has been alleged to be one such beneficiary/financier.

8) It is stated that Applicant statement was recorded on 22 nd December

2010 interalia wherein the Applicant has clearly stated that the Applicant
had bank accounts with HDFC Bank Ltd Jodhpur Branch Ahmedabad.
The Applicant also deposed that the Applicant was having demat
account with Khandwala Integrated Financial Services Ltd. And trading
accounts with M/s Khandwala Integrated Financial Services Ltd and
with M/s Active Finstock Ltd.

9) It is stated that based on the statements submitted by the Applicant and

investigation done by CBI and ED, it is alleged that the Applicant
cornered 11,00,000 shares of IPO of IDFC and 13,550 shares of IPO of
Sasken to the detriment of retail individual investors in contravention to
an offence U/s. 45 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 for the
offence of Money Laundering under Section 3 punishable under Section
4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002.

10) It is stated that Securities Appellate Tribunal vide its order dated 5 th July,
2010 in para 14 observed that the Applicant has made no profits himself
and only acted in league with the other Accused and just a willing tool in
the hands of other Accused, and the question of any disproportionate
gain or unfair advantage made by the Applicant does not arise The
Hon’ble SAT also observed that there is nothing on record to show the
amount of loss caused to any investor or group of investors .

11) In view of the allegations, the Applicant is charged with offence of

money laundering in terms of section 3 punishable under section 4 of
PMLA 2002.

12) The Applicant asserts innocence and humbly prays for restoration of his
liberty currently curtailed through abuse of judicial process and prays for
bail on the following, among other, grounds:

GROUNDS

a) The Applicant asserts innocence and claims that he has been

falsely implicated and made a scape goat by the prosecution who
are investigating the alleged offence on directions without legal
cause or action, with respect to matters which had arisen even
prior to 1.7.2005 when the PMLA Act came into force.

b) The Applicant offered an explanation to the ED, where the

Applicant submitted that the Applicant shared a relationship of
lender /borrower and seller purchaser of shares and the Applicant
was not acting with prior understanding and in convivence with
other Accused and neither had any intention to amass huge
quantity of shares of IDFC and Sasken in the IPOs by these
Companies , to the detriment of RIIs. However, the ED refused to
take on record these submissions made by the Applicant and
sought to allege that the explanation given by the Applicant was
evasive. It is submitted that this allegation of the ED on the face
of record produced by the Applicant is ex facie erroneous,
perfunctory and capricious.

c) The Applicants submits that the Hon’ble SAT in its order dated 5th
July,2010 noted that the Applicant has made no profits himself
and only acted in league with the other Accused and just a willing
tool in the hands of other Accused, and the question of any
disproportionate gain or unfair advantage made by the Applicant
does not arise.

d) The Applicant submits that there is nothing on record to show the

amount of loss caused to any investor or group of investors by the
Applicant.

e) The Applicant submits that the allegation of the Applicant’s

complicity is equally preposterous on the grounds as is sought to
 be speciously alleged that the Applicant in the respect of the
transfer of funds to an entity, vis a vis, pixel trading company. A
complicity sought to be alleged and the plea of bail sought to be
opposed on the surmises and conjectures and the premise of
suspicion which is ex facie in the teeth of criminal jurisprudence.

f) A bare perusal of the scheme of the PMLA makes it apparently

clear that a commission of a scheduled offence is the fundamental
precondition for any proceeding under the Act, as without a
scheduled offence being committed, the question of proceeds of
crime coming into existence does not arise. It is submitted that the
entire proceedings initiated by the Respondent admittedly relate
to matters prior to 1.7.2005 when the PML Act came into force.
As the Act has no retrospective effect and the purported crime if
any, having taken place prior to 1.7.2005 could not have attracted
any of the actions that can be taken under the provisions of the
P.M.L.Act. Hence, the proceedings would be bad at law

g) Thus, in cases where the scheduled offence is itself negated, the

fundamental premise of continuing any proceedings under the
PMLA also vanishes.

h) It is submitted that the allegations made itself reveals that the

Applicant has nothing to do with matters related thereto. The
Applicant had been innocently got involved in the matter which in
any event had taken place prior to 15.2.2013 when the entire
Schedule to the PML Act got substituted with effect from
15.2.2013. Hence, invoking of the provisions of Law, which had
since then ceased to exist in the statute and conducting of a
proceedings before this Hon'ble Court itself would not be
applicable.

i) Further the provisions of Section 45 of the P.M.L.Act has also

been amended with effect from 19.4.2018 and 1.8.2019 and
consequently the amended provisions to the provisions of Section
45 of the P.M.L.Act would not be applicable and only those
 provisions as it stood prior to 19.4.2018 and 1.8.2019 would be
applicable. The provisions of Section 45 of the P.M.L.Act has
been held to be unconstitutional by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India and hence the Applicant/Accused be accorded bail.

j) No other application seeking similar reliefs is filed or pending in

this Hon’ble Court or any other Court in India. This Hon’ble
Court has jurisdiction to try and entertain the present application.

k) The Applicant is a senior responsible citizen and permanently

residing in India and suffers from various medical ailments such
as Advanced Parkinson’s disease with motor fluctuation,
progressive slowness, postural instability and there is no reason
for any arrest or any coercive steps against the Applicant as there
is no investigation pending or anything to be recovered from the
Applicant in the matter which could have warranted custody of
the Applicant The matter as such is already decided by the
Respondent and the present proceeding is one more action which
is purported to have been initiated by the Respondent.

l) The Applicant will not tamper with the prosecution witness(s) or

any evidence.

m) The Applicant has no previous criminal record or antecedents to

his mis-credit.

n) The Applicant has not violated any laws with any intention or
knowledge and is a victim of circumstances

o) The Applicant shall cooperate at all times and participate

effectively in the proceedings and shall render all necessary
assistance as required in the matter.

p) For reasons aforementioned, among others to be orally

supplemented during the hearing of this application, the Applicant
prays as under :-
 P R A Y E R S :-

A) The Applicant may please be ordered to be released on bail in P.M.L.A

SPECIAL CASE 27 OF 2018 IN ECIR No. ECIR/01/AZO/2007 &
ECIR/01/AZO 2008 registered by the Directorate of Enforcement,
Mumbai for alleged offences U/s.3 and 4 of the PMLA Act, upon such
terms and conditions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in
the facts and circumstances of the case;

B) Such other and further orders be passed and releifs be granted as the
facts and circumstances of the case may require in the interest of Natural
Justice. And for this act of kindness the Applicant shall remain obliged
forever.

Place: Mumbai

Dated this 27th day of July, 2021.

Parinam Law Associates

Advocate for the Applicant/Accused No. 35 & 36
 IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR
GREATER BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO. OF 2021
IN
P.M.L.A SPECIAL CASE 27 OF 2018
IN
ECIR/01/AZO/2007 & ECIR/01/AZO 2008

Bhanuprasad Trivedi HUF

…Applicant/ Accused No.35

Bhanuprasad Ochhaval Trivedi

… Applicant/Accused No. 36

v/s

Amrendra Kumar
… Respondent/Complainant

******************************************

APPLICATION SEEKING BAIL OF THE

ACCUSED NO. 35 & 36

******************************************

Dated this 27th July,2021.

PARINAM LAW ASSOCIATES

ADVOCATES FOR ACCUSED NO. 35& 36
4TH FLOOR, EXPRESS TOWERS,
RAMNATH GOENKA MARG,
NARIMAN POINT,
MUMBAI – 400 021