Sukesh Chandrashekhar Extortion Case: Delhi High Court Grants Bail To 69-Yr-Old Accused In MCOCA, PMLA Cases
Case: AVTAR SINGH KOCCHAR @ DOLLY v. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE
Coram: Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma
Case No.: BAIL APPLN. 1814/2023
Court Observation: “Though the allegations against the accused are very serious in nature, however, the court at this stage would restrain itself from making any detailed discussion about the merit of the case as it may prejudice the parties. In order to deny the bail to the petitioner, there has to be more than mere allegations,”.
“If the petitioner is a Hawala Operator, the State is at liberty to initiate any action against him in accordance with the law. However, in order to keep the petitioner in custody in the present case, the court is required to consider his role in this case only. Merely because the petitioner has been alleged to be a Hawala Operator, the bail cannot be denied to him. The court is required to keep itself confined to the facts of the present case,”.
“The evidence against the petitioner are confessional statement which though can be seen at this stage but the evidentiary value of the same has to be seen during the trial. It is also a settled proposition that at this stage it is not necessary or desirable to weigh the evidence meticulously to arrive at a positive finding as to whether or not the petitioner has committed an offence under Section 3(2) as well as Section 24 of MCOCA Act,”.
Previous Posts
Keywords
Sukesh Chandrashekhar Extortion Case
