Home Case Index All Cases Money Laundering Money Laundering + HC Money Laundering - 2017 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (6) TMI 1362 - HC - Money LaunderingCriminal Conspiracy - seeking to transfer the cases pending on the file of the Court of XI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge for CBI Cases, (Banks and Financial Institutions) to the Principal Sessions Judge at Chennai, (Special Court for Prevention of Money Laundering Act), where application filed by the second respondent, namely, Directorate of Enforcement, is pending - sanctioning housing loans/ additional housing loans without adhering to the basic Banking norms of pre-sanction requirements to various persons - Sections 120 (B), read with 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal code, 1860 as well as Section 13 (2) read with 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - HELD THAT:- The main ground on which the instant transfer sought for by the petitioners is that the the second respondent, namely, the Directorate of Enforcement, has also filed a private complaint before the Special Court for Prevention of Money Laundering Act, i.e. Principal Sessions Judge at Chennai, which is constituted for trying the cases contemplated under the Act, 2002 and same has also been taken cognizance by the the Special Court for the aforesaid offences. Therefore, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that since the second respondent has initiated proceedings under the provisions of the Act, 2002, Special Court constituted for the said Act, i.e. Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai, alone is competent to try the cases. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for allowing the petitions. Merely because private complaint was filed by the 2nd respondent before the Special Court with regard to Money laundering, it cannot be stated that the cases investigated by the CBI with regard to the aforesaid crime also have to be tried by the Special Court constituted under the Act, 2002. If such view has been taken by this Court, there will be unwarranted delay in entire criminal prosecution launched by the CBI before the concerned Court. The object of constituting a Special Court is only to speed up the trial with regard to money laundering - Admittedly, in the instant cases, the CBI has not charge sheeted the petitioners for the offence relating to money laundering as contemplated under the Act, 2002. That being the case, the relief sought for by the petitioners seeking to transfer of the aforesaid cases from the file of the XI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge for CBI cases, cannot be ordered merely because such cases also involve serious bank frauds. This Court is of the view that no prejudice would be caused to the accused in allowing the trial to be continued in the CBI Court. That apart, even in a case and counter case arising out of the same transaction, there cannot be any common evidence and the evidence of each case, has to be assessed independently for deciding the same. Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the evidence would be common in the CBI charge sheeted case as well as the case pending on the file of the Special Court for Prevention of Money Laundering is not sustainable in law - Petition dismissed.
|