The Jharkhand High Court on Friday granted bail to former chief minister Hemant Soren in the money laundering case related to the alleged land scam.
While granting Soren’s release, Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay questioned the integrity of the ED’s claim that their timely action prevented Soren and others from illegally acquiring land. According to the Bar and Bench report, the judge noted that this claim appeared unclear.
The court found that there is reason to believe that the CEO of JMM is not guilty of the alleged money laundering crime.
Hemant Soren walked out of Birsa Munda Jail in Ranchi after five months on bail of 50,000 rupees with two sureties of the same amount. The Supervisory Board arrested the 48-year-old politician at his official residence on January 31.
Jharkhand High Court’s Mentions
ED claimed that their timely action prevented Hemant Soren and others from acquiring land illegally. Questioning the probe agency’s claim, Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay said it appeared “vague”, especially given the testimony of other witnesses suggesting that Soren had already acquired the land in question.
“The contention of the Executive that its timely action prevented the illegal acquisition of the land through forgery and manipulation of documents appears to be a dubious contention given the contention that the land was already acquired and in possession. of the petitioner as per some statements recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002, and also from 2010 onwards.
All evidence of the direct involvement of the former PM in the acquisition and possession of disputed land
Supreme Court rejects ED lawyer SV Raju’s argument that if Soren is released on bail, he may commit a similar crime. the probability that the applicant commits a similar crime.
The court also noted that none of the victims approached the police to file complaints about the alleged land acquisition even though Hemant Soren was not in power in Jharkhand during the relevant period.
“There was no reason why the alleged aliens of the land in question should not approach the authorities for redress of their grievances if the petitioner acquired and possessed the said land at a time when the petitioner was not in power. ” The court noted and added that the two bail conditions stipulated in Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLS) are fulfilled in this case.
Hemant Soren was forced to spend five months in jail.
Further, the court also observed that none of the records or revenue records presented by the ED proved the direct involvement of the former prime minister in the acquisition and management of the disputed land.
Rejecting ED counsel SV Raju’s contention that if Soren is released on bail, he may commit a similar offense, the apex court said the petitioner is unlikely to commit a similar offense.
The court also noted that none of the victims approached the police to file complaints about the alleged land acquisition even though Hemant Soren was not in power in Jharkhand during the relevant period.
“There was no reason why the alleged aliens of the land in question should not approach the authorities for redress of their grievances if the petitioner acquired and possessed the said land at a time when the petitioner was not in power. The two bail requirements outlined in Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLS) are met in this instance, the court stated.
