VIJAY DEO JHA
Ranchi, Jan. 9: The special PMLA court of Prabhat Kumar Sharma has rejected the discharge petition of the illegal stone mining accused, Bacchu Yadav, stating that the prosecution has submitted sufficient evidence to establish his connection with Pankaj Mishra and his involvement in the crime.
The order of the court has been uploaded today. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) arrested Bacchu Yadav on August 5 last year for his involvement in the Rs 1000 crore illegal mining case.
Bacchu Yadav claimed that he was not involved in the alleged offence and has no concern with the alleged occurrence. There was no evidence on record to bring out any of the ingredients of the alleged offence against him. He contended that the case in which he was arrested by the ED, 85/2020, was originally lodged in June 2020 at Barharwa police station in Sahibganj against Pankaj Mishra for threatening petitioner Shambhu Nandan Kumar for participating in the Barharwa toll plaza case. And, in this case he was not named as an accused in the FIR. During further investigation also his name did not surface and his name never appeared in the charge sheet.
He said that the ED conducted raids at various locations at Sahibganj and seizure of documents and other things related to others were made. But in the entire process nothing incriminating documents or cash or anything relating to the present petitioner were seized or recovered from his premises, and, till date no attachment has been made with respect to any property relating to him.
Bacchu Yadav said that he was merely a worker and had never been involved in any illegal activities directly or indirectly. The ED also failed to bring out any statement or any evidence during his interrogation or in custody. He claimed that he had not knowingly assisted Pankaj Mishra in his illegal activities relating to the stone mining and there is no iota of evidence for such a complaint. He said that the Rs 30 Lakh cash was found deposited in his bank account at Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank January 24 last year which the ED claims as proceeds of crime. Bacchu said that he was arrested on the premise that he is the accomplices of Pankaj Mishra and knowingly assisted him in generating proceeds of crime. But Pankaj Mishra in his statement denied that he knew him. He claimed that he has no concern with Pankaj Mishra and have never talked to him and have been implicated for some ulterior motive and the same fact could have been verified by the CDR of Pankaj Mishra. But the same have been intentionally ignored. He claimed that he has no good relations with Pankaj Mishra and he is not involved in any illegal activities either himself or in collusion with Pankaj Mishra or with Prem Prakash. He also claimed that he explained the source of Rs 30 lakh to the ED. He said that the single deposit was made for the purpose of purchasing a property and deposits were made by taking a loan to the extent of 7 to 8 lakh from several relatives and rest amounts were accumulated from agricultural business, dairy farm, mango business and one good truck.
But the ED vehemently countered his claims and stated that Bacchu Yadav used to receive booty of crime in every mining lease and trucks by way of extortion. The ED claimed Bacchu Yadav could not give a satisfactory answer of the source of that huge deposit of Rs 30 Lakh in his bank account 0000014021027005. The ED stated that Bacchu Yadav has criminal antecedents and was knowingly a party in the activities connected with extortion and collection of levies from the vehicles carrying stone chips illegally.
He was directly involved in operations of inland vessels engaged in illegal transportation of trucks laden with stone chips from Sahibganj to Bihar and collection of levies from trucks transported on inland vessels carrying illegally mined stone chips. The ED explained to the court that the offence of money laundering is an independent offence and it is not necessary that the accused charged with the offence of money laundering are the same who are accused in predicate offence.