Money laundering case: Court declines to stay proceedings against judge, builders

A Special Court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in Panchkula has refused to stay proceedings against suspended judge Sudhir Parmar and real estate developers Pankaj Bansal and Basant Bansal of M3M, Lalit Goyal of IREO, and Anil Bhalla of Vatika. The judge is accused of accepting illegal gratification to favour builders in court proceedings.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has alleged that judge Parmar purchased properties worth Rs 7.49 crore in the names of relatives in March and April 2022 while investigations against IREO and M3M were ongoing. Lalit Goyal, MD of IREO, was arrested by the ED in 2021 on money laundering charges and the agency filed a prosecution complaint on January 14, 2022.

In April 2023, the Haryana Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) registered an FIR accusing judge Parmar of colluding with M3M and IREO groups to gain undue benefits. The ED subsequently lodged a case based on the ACB’s findings. The ACB’s investigation has concluded and the chargesheet has been sent to the Punjab and Haryana High Court for sanction to prosecute Parmar.

Pankaj and Basant Bansal had filed applications in the Special PMLA Court requesting a stay on the proceedings until the ACB filed its chargesheet, arguing that the predicate offence was yet to be established. They claimed the stay was necessary “in the larger interest of justice” until the final report was submitted.

The ED opposed the plea, alleging it was a deliberate attempt to delay proceedings.

Special PMLA Judge Rajeev Goyal dismissed the applications, stating that the ACB’s investigation was complete and the chargesheet had been finalised. “The report submitted by the ACB makes it clear that the investigation stands concluded and the chargesheet along with all relevant documents has been sent to the competent authority seeking sanction to prosecute the judge,” the judge said.

“In my firm opinion, on the report of the Anti-Corruption Bureau dated November 26, 2024, having been submitted in the court, the applicants in all fairness should have withdrawn their applications. Their persistence without reason has only resulted in wastage of precious court time, which ought to have been saved and well utilised elsewhere,” judge Goyal said.

The judge also pointed out that the proceedings were not impeded by any stay on the ACB’s investigation or a pending chargesheet.