 Early Times Report
Jammu, May 21: Principal Sessions Judge Ganderbal Abdul Nasir rejected the bail applications father, daughter, son and one other in 54 crores online gaming fraud case.
While rejecting the bail applications of Rumaisa Jan D/o Ghulam Nabi Shah, Ghulam Nabi Shah s/o Ghulam Mohammd Shah, Shahnawaz Ahmad Shah S/o Ghulam Nabi shah residents of Kangan Ganderbal and Aamir Bashir Magray S/O Bashir Ahmad Magray R/o Bonizal Haripora Kangan Ganderbal, observed that in the present case, it is found from the record submitted by the police that the accused have indulged in monetary transactions amounting to Rs. 53,21,72,049/- and the investigating agency has resorted to inclusion of offences u/s 4 P.M.L.A. It is yet to be ascertained where the huge money of transactions as reflected in bank accounts of the accused persons/applicants has gone and from where this money came into bank accounts of the accused persons.
Court further observed that There is complaint of commission of fraud against the applicants and the transactions in the name of applicants need to be given a serious thought so that it may not result any prejudice and loss to the interest of nation/society. in case tomorrow the applicants are found to be involved in commission of Cyber Crime/offences under Money Laundering Act and accused being already admitted to bail, this may result in serious prejudice to the investigation and the accused may flee from the cause of justice.
Court further observed that so far as the question with respect to no mule account in the name of accused is concerned, the investigation to that extent is yet going on. There is a complaint against the accused that they have defrauded people through the medium of playing online game and have extracted huge money which has been deposited in their bank accounts. Therefore, the matter is being investigated regarding the investment of the money by the accused persons and the source of money extracted by the accused persons from the people at large. The question whether the accused have committed an organized crime or not cannot be straight way taken into consideration for discarding the apprehension of the investigating agency that the accused persons are involved in the commission of organized crime and to that extent the investigation is going on. There is extensive and meticulous efforts by the investigating agency to unearth the nexus between the accused persons and other with respect to financial misconduct and there is chance of emerging evidence to see whether the accused are involved in the commission of Money Laundering offences or not, and if it is so established against the accused, it may have a very serious and severe effect on the society and national interest as well. The evidence on record including the financial transactions requires a very deep scrutiny regarding the financial transactions of the accused and the status of the business of the accused, so the release of the accused at this stage may result in effecting the quality of ongoing investigation and the haze in granting bail to the accused may result in¬consequences which may pose a grave risk to the society at large and may prejudice the ongoing investigation. With these observations, the Court rejected the bail applications. (JNF) |
