Money Laundering Case: Jharkhand HC grants bail to Hemant Soren saying “There is reason to believe that he is not guilty of the offence as alleged”

On June 28, 2024, the Jharkhand High Court (HC) granted bail to former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren in the money laundering case linked with an alleged land scam. While granting relief to Hemant Soren, the bench observed that there ‘exists reason to believe’ that he is not guilty of the offence under the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act). After this, Soren’s lawyer, Advocate Arunabh Chowdhury told the PTI, “Bail has been granted to Soren. The Court has held that prima facie he is not guilty of the offence and there is no likelihood of the petitioner committing an offence when on bail.” Hemant Soren was arrested by the ED (Enforcement Directorate) on January 31 and was lodged in the Birsa Munda jail in Ranchi since then. 

During the proceedings, the bench observed, “It is indeed surprising as to how these persons could purchase the land when admittedly it is a ‘Bakast Bhuinhari’ land which is non-transferrable in terms of Section 48 of the CNT Act. The verification of the land as ostensively done at the behest of the petitioner is traced back to Abhishek @ Pintu, the Press Advisor whose initiation of such verification ultimately reached Bhanu Pratap Prasad through various intermediaries, which is apparent from the statement of such persons recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002. As per the allegations emanating from the statements of the persons recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002, the petitioner had acquired and possessed the land comprising of 8.86 acres in the year 2010, and the boundary wall was also constructed and it seems that only during the tenure of Bhanu Pratap Prasad, Revenue Sub Inspector, Circle Office, Baragain, Ranchi there was a necessity to verify the land in question which seems to be farfetched and with an intent to prosecute the petitioner.”

The ED also claimed that the petitioner (Hemant Soren) and others had forcibly got people evicted in the year 2009-10 and the Police did not entertain the complaints made. The bench said, “There was no reason for the purported oustees from the land in question not to have approached the authorities for redressal of their grievance if at all the petitioner had acquired and possessed the said land when the petitioner was not in power. The claim of the Enforcement Directorate that its timely action had prevented the illegal acquisition of the land by forging and manipulating the records seems to be an ambiguous statement when considered in the backdrop of the allegation that the land was already acquired and possessed by the petitioner as per some of the statements recorded u/s 50 PMLA, 2002 and that too from the year 2010 onwards.”

After hearing the matter, the Jharkhand HC said “The consequence of the findings recorded by this Court satisfies the condition as at Section 45 PMLA, 2002 to the effect that there is ‘reason to believe’ that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence as alleged.” It added, “the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-I-cum-Special Judge, PMLA, Ranchi…”