9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 1716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd set aside the prosecution complaint in ECIR No. JPZO/01/2016. 4. As per the petitioners, the facts of the case are that petitioners are the Chairman & Managing Director of World Trade Park Ltd. which has constructed an urban infrastructure project popularly known as WTP at J.L.N. Marg, Jaipur. Bharat Bomb booked spaces through their company M/S Raj Darbar Material Trading Pvt. Ltd. and paid advance amount. Bharat Bomb sent communication that the commercial units booked, should be registered in the name of third parties. Petitioners, therefore, returned back the amount deposited by M/S Raj Darbar Material Trading Pvt. Ltd. and after obtaining money from new entities, registered the properties in the name of new entities. The possession of such units was also handed over to the buyers. 5. An F.I.R. No. RCBD1/2016/E/02 dated 07.03.2016 was registered by CBI, BS&FC, New Delhi against the officials of Syndicate Bank's three branches for offence under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472 & 474 of IPC and Sections 13 (2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The allegation was of siphoning Rs. 1055.79/- crores. Charge-sheet was also filed in that case. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioners were not aware that the sale proceeds were relating to any scheduled offence hence they executed the sale deed after receiving money from the purchasers. It is also contended that Bharat Bomb and his employees have cheated the bank and petitioners were not aware of the same. 10. It is also contended that offence under the PMLA Act is non-cognizable hence, Enforcement Directorate could not have proceeded without sanction of the Magistrate in accordance with Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) and since the respondents have proceeded without following the safeguards provided under Cr.P.C., the entire proceedings are bad in law. 11. Counsel for the petitioners have further contended that the mandate provided under Section 155 (2) Cr.P.C. was not followed which has vitiated the investigation. Reliance has been placed on "H.N. Rishbud vs. State of Delhi" AIR 1995 SC 196. Reliance has also been placed on "State of Haryana vs Bhajan Lal & Ors." AIR 1992 SC 604, wherein the Apex Court has laid down the categories in which the proceedings can be quashed under Article 226 and Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 12 Counsel for the petitioners contends that criminal proceedings at the st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unsel appearing for Enforcement Directorate has vehemently opposed the writ petition. It is contended that the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is a self contained code and gives overriding effects to any other law for the time being in force. It is also contended that the offences under the Act are cognizable and the only bar is that the Special Court shall not take cognizance of any offence punishable under section 4 except upon a complaint in writing made by the Director; or any officer authorized by the Government in this behalf by that Government. 17. Counsel for Enforcement Directorate has drawn the attention of the Court to the provisions of the Act, investigation is defined in sub-clause (na) of Section 2 of the Act which reads as under:- "investigation" includes all the proceedings under this Act conducted by the Director or by an authority authorised by the Central Government under this Act for the collection of evidence" 18. Chapter V of the Act deals with the summons, searches and seizure etc. The authority, on the basis of material in its possession and after recording the reason for such belief in writing may enter any place for the purpose of survey. Simi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Special Court may, upon a complaint made by an authority authorised in this behalf under this Act take cognizance of offence under section 3. It is further contended that a complaint is required to be filed before the Special Court and Special Court has authority to take cognizance of offence under section 3, without the accused being committed to it for trial. Sub-clause (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 44 of the Act further provides that, if the court which has taken cognizance of the scheduled offence is other than the Special Court which has taken cognizance of the complaint of the offence of money-laundering, the court which has taken cognizance of the scheduled offence shall commit the case to the Special Courts. 24. It is contended that the procedure for investigation, search, seizure and arrest is provided in the Act itself and all safeguards have been provided under the Act. 25. It is contended that the petitioners initially took money from Bharat Bomb and his associate companies and subsequently, siphoned the amount back to Bharat Bomb and took money from fake companies which were proceeds of crime and has thus committed offence of money laundering. 26. It is conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of India & Ors." 2015 SCC Online P.N.H. 19739, wherein Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the Prevention of Money Laundering Act has given ample power to the authorities and methodology has been prescribed which prima facie goes to show that sufficient safeguards are in place and adjudicating authority is to monitor the investigation and the arrest can only be on the basis of reason to be recorded in writing. 31. Reliance has also been placed on "Hari Narayan Rai vs. Union of India and Ors." 2012 (21) RCR (Cri.) 932, wherein, the Jharkhand High Court has held that provisions of the Act have been given overriding effect and provisions of Cr.P.C. shall apply in so far as they are not inconsistent with provisions of the Act. Being a special statute, the procedure for dealing with the offences are regulated by the provisions contained in the said Act and that cognizance for the offence punishable under the Act shall be taken only upon a complaint made by an authority authorized on behalf of the Section 44 of the Act. 32. I have considered the contentions. 33. The prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was enacted to prevent money-laundering and to provide for confisca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re silent as to the particular aspects. Bombay High Court has held that by deletion of clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 45 of the Act, the offence would not become non-cognizable as the said clause was deleted with an intention to ensure that there is no conflict in the power of arrest exercised by the Police Officers and the Authorities authorized under the Act. 37. Gujrat High Court in "Mukesh Kumar Vs. State of Gujrat" (supra), held that the offences under the Act are cognizable and authorized authority can file a complaint after completion of investigation which shall be the basis of taking cognizance and Delhi High Court in "Virbhadra Singh & Anr. Vs. Enforcement Directorate & Anr." (supra), has held that the power to arrest conferred on the Director or the other specified officers is contingent upon formal authorization by the court. The Court held that prior approval from the Court is not required and even after deletion of Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 45 of the Act, the offence continues to be cognizable. 38. 14. Reliance has been placed by counsel for the petitioners on "Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit Vs. Union of India" 2018 SCC OnLine Del 7281 wherein D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udgement of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bhupen Champak Lal Dalal (supra), Uttam Chand Vs. Income Tax Officer (supra) relied upon by the counsel for the petitioners are cases pertaining to the Income Tax Act. The proceedings were stayed before the Criminal Court as the assessment was pending before the appellate authority of the Income Tax Department. The facts of those cases have no applicability to the present case before the Court. Proceedings before the Special Court which is dealing with the offence of Money Laundering Act cannot be stayed till the disposal of the appeal before the appellate authority under the Act, as in the appeal proceedings pertaining to the attachment of the property are in challenge, whereas in the criminal proceedings the Court has to deal with the offence of money laundering. It is clearly made out in the complaint that fraud was committed with Syndicate Bank to the tune of more than Rs. 1000 crores and the proceeds of the crime were used to purchase properties in World Trade Park, there is no bar under the PMLA Act from proceeding with the trial of the case. The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal lies when the Director or any person is aggrieved b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rat Bomb who is involved in Bank scam of Rs. 1000 crores. The petitioners have instead of transferring the sale proceeds directly to escrow account opened accounts and has transferred the proceeds and hence, his involvement is writ large. The judgments referred to by the counsel for the petitioners thus have no applicability. 45. From the investigation done, it is revealed that from the account of fictitious firms/companies created by Bharat Bomb, huge amount was transferred to the World Trade Park Ltd. and sincere infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. of which petitioners is Chairman and Managing Director. It is revealed from the reply that Bharat Bomb transferred more than Rs. 160/- crores to petitioner No. 1 and his companies from his fictitious firms. Petitioner No. 1 facilitated Bharat Bomb in placement, layering and integration of proceeds of crime by selling the property in name of different persons including fictitious firms controlled by Bharat Bomb. 46. It is also revealed from the reply submitted by the Enforcement Directorate that the petitioners had got the project financed by World Trade Park from IDBI Bank, DHFL Bank and UCO Bank and World Trade Park was mortgaged with the bank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so did not disclose the purchase of property as per requirement of Income Tax. It is also revealed that the loan amount in relation to the said properties was paid from the tainted money by Bharat Bomb. 50. From investigation done by the Enforcement Directorate, it is also revealed that petitioners opened two accounts and had transferred amount directly to those accounts and had thus utilized the proceeds of crime and offence under the Money Laundering Act is made out. 51. Complaint has already been filed against the petitioners in the Special Court constituted under the Money Laundering Act and Special Court have already taken cognizance against the petitioners. 52. Writ Petition No. 704/2018 was preferred with a prayer to quash and set aside ECIR No. JPZO/01/2016, registered by Jaipur Zonal Office of Enforcement Directorate qua the petitioners. Since the investigation has been completed and complaint has been filed, the Criminal Writ Petition No. 704/2018 has become infructuous and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. 53. As far as the Writ petition No. 757/2018 is concerned, the prayer in the writ petition is for quashing the complaint. Judgment of "State of Haryana vs Bhaja ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
