Special Court in Mumbai Rejects Discharge Pleas in High-Profile Money Laundering Case
In a significant development, a special court in Mumbai has firmly rejected the discharge applications filed by Premier Port Links Pvt Ltd, a company owned by Salil Deshmukh, along with two chartered accountants, in a high-stakes money laundering case connected to former Maharashtra home minister Anil Deshmukh. The court, presided over by special judge Mahesh K Jadhav, delivered this ruling on Saturday, emphasizing that the prosecution has established a robust prima facie case warranting the framing of charges.
Court Details Alleged Corporate Structure for Laundering
Judge Jadhav, in his detailed order, observed that Premier Port Links Pvt Ltd appears to be one of the entities controlled and managed by co-accused Anil Deshmukh and his family. The court noted that the company was utilized as an integral component of a larger corporate framework specifically designed for the layering and integration of illicit funds. This finding underscores the alleged systematic approach to money laundering in this case.
The judge highlighted specific financial transactions, pointing out that the company, in alleged conspiracy with others, acquired illegal loans amounting to Rs 2.2 crore from Flourish Properties Pvt Ltd. Investigators have claimed that Deshmukh's family infused funds into Flourish Properties through share capital, creating a complex financial trail. Furthermore, the court noted that 50% of the shares in Premier Port Links were allotted to Salil Deshmukh for a mere Rs 17.5 lakh, despite the company holding assets valued at approximately Rs 5.4 crore, raising serious questions about the transaction's legitimacy.
Background of the Case and Allegations
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has alleged that during his tenure as home minister, Anil Deshmukh received around Rs 4.7 crore, which was purportedly collected from owners and managers of orchestra bars to ensure their smooth operation during the COVID-19 pandemic. The agency's investigation revealed that Deshmukh's chartered accountant, Sudhir Baheti, introduced Delhi-based hawala operators to Hrishikesh Deshmukh, Anil Deshmukh's son.
Subsequently, nearly Rs 4.2 crore was transferred in various tranches to a trust from paper companies associated with these hawala operators, disguised as donations. This intricate web of financial movements forms the core of the money laundering allegations.
Court's Rejection of Defence Arguments
In its defence, Premier Port Links argued that its land transactions and loans were finalized years before the alleged scheduled offence occurred. The company also contended that, as a non-legal person, it could not possess criminal intent. However, the prosecution successfully countered these arguments by asserting that the Deshmukh family exercised substantive control over the entity, actively using it to layer tainted funds.
Judge Jadhav firmly supported this view, stating, "The company has, thus, got directly indulged and is actually involved in the concealment, possession, acquisition and use of proceeds of crime." The court noted that the company acquired proceeds of crime across multiple financial years, cleverly concealing them under the guise of loans intended for land acquisition.
Money Laundering as a Continued Offence
Addressing the timing argument raised by the defence, the judge provided crucial clarification regarding the nature of money laundering offences under Indian law. Judge Jadhav emphasized that money laundering constitutes a continued offence, meaning that the specific timing of property acquisition becomes irrelevant in determining culpability. Therefore, this argument could not serve as grounds for discharging the company from the case.
The court further noted that the legal framework against money laundering serves as a "crucial mechanism to ensure that the individuals involved in laundering the proceeds of crime are brought to justice and that economic offence does not go unpunished." This statement reinforces the judiciary's commitment to tackling financial crimes rigorously.
Chartered Accountants Also Denied Discharge
In separate but related orders, the court also refused to discharge chartered accountants Vinod Hassani and Vishal Khatwani. Both professionals had claimed they were merely providing routine professional services without any knowledge of the funds' illicit origins. Hassani specifically argued that he had resigned from his firm in 2017, well before the alleged generation of crime proceeds.
However, the court found compelling evidence to the contrary. Judge Jadhav pointed to statements indicating that Hassani remained associated with the firm in an advisory capacity and was found in possession of share certificates as late as 2020. The court determined that both chartered accountants were "instrumental in managing the financial affairs of a network of companies controlled by the co-accused Anil Deshmukh and his family."
Professional Expertise Misused for Money Laundering
The judge concluded that the chartered accountants played an active role that transcended passive professional work. Their involvement with dummy directors and documentation indicated a conscious effort to misuse their professional expertise to facilitate money laundering operations. Judge Jadhav stated they played a "conscious role in creating and maintaining a corporate veil for laundering operations which transcends passive routine professional work."
This ruling marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing legal proceedings against Anil Deshmukh and his associates, highlighting the judiciary's firm stance against economic offences and the sophisticated mechanisms often employed to conceal illicit wealth.
