[Bhima Koregaon] NIA Court allows ED to record statement of Surendra Gadling in money laundering case

A Special Court in Mumbai today permitted the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to record statement of Bhima Koregaon accused Surendra Gadling in connection with a money laundering case registered by the agency last year in which he is allegedly a prime suspect..Special NIA judge Rajesh Katariya passed the order.“Whether there exists proceeds of crime (or not) is part of the investigation of the authority. Since ECIR is recorded, his statement can be taken,” the judge held.Gadling is presently lodged in the custody of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) court awaiting trial in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon riots case in which he is accused of organising the Elgar Parishad event where inciteful speeches were made leading to riots. .ED in its application sought permission to interrogate Gadling who according to them conspired with the other active members of the outlawed CPI (Maoist) members in raising money and disbursing it for "violent activities”. After having established Gadling's role, it sought to record his statement in accordance with Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).During the hearing today, ED counsel Sunil Gonsalves submitted that for registering a case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), what is required is commission of a scheduled offence under PMLA.He argued that Gadling was accused under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) which was listed in the schedule under PMLA.Gonsalves stated that there were fictitious accounts through which transactions had taken place.“This is a case where we need to probe further. Under UAPA a crime was committed. Later a case for registering an ECIR is made out. A person can be prosecuted under Section 420 (of the Indian Penal Code for cheating), and if convicted will be punished with 3 years imprisonment. But that is about the action. What about the money he earned and passed on to someone else?” Gonsalves argued..Gadling, appearing in person, meanwhile made submissions opposing the plea.He contended that allegations made against him did not involve PMLA.“Mere registration of scheduled offence did not give power to ED to invoke PMLA. This will happen in every case where there is scheduled offence”, Gadling contended.His secondary contention was that the multiple chargesheets, which the courts had taken cognizance of, did not make any mention of the proceeds of crime.“Your chargesheet on predicate offence does not talk of proceeds of crime. When predicate offence chargesheet is silent can you proceed on proceeds of crime?” Gadling said. It was also his argument that the prosecution agencies were trying to trap him in a fresh case after it was highlighted through report by Arsenal, a US based agency, that the electronic evidence against him in the case was planted on his devices.“In 2018, when the Bombay High Court granted default bail in the Bhima Koregaon case, another case was slapped against me in Gadchiroli. Now after the Arsenal has come up with a report on my harddisk, the ED has slapped a case on me, to keep me in custody. This is a harassment technique and I may be protected”, Gadling said..Gonsalves at this point clarified that what the agency was seeking was merely to go to prison and record the statement and no custody was being sought at the moment.After hearing both sides briefly, the Court allowed the application.