TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 666X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shing of proceedings against accused in the predicate offence, following the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in VIJAY MADANLAL CHOUDHARY ORS. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ORS. [ 2022 (7) TMI 1316 - SUPREME COURT] , the proceedings in ECIR/HYZO/34/2021, Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad Zonal Office are hereby quashed. The criminal petition is allowed. - CRIMINAL PETITION No. 712 OF 2023 - - - Dated:- 28-3-2023 - THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER And THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER ORDER 1. Petitioner is questioning the continuance of the proceedings vide ECIR/HYZO/34/2021, Directorate of Enforcement, Hyderabad Zonal Office. 2. This Court in Criminal Petition Nos.439 and 545 of 2023 has quashed the proceed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... name. The Society with the assistance of A1 to A6 entered into the property in the year 2017 and started construction activity and also causing nuisance to the neighbor in plot No.853-C. During the Covid pandemic period in 2019, A1 to A6 with the support of A9-Sub-Registrar registered the plot vide document No.2675 of 2020 in the name of Ch.Sirisha @ Rs.126/- per sq.yard for a total consideration of Rs.1,91,000/- even though the market value is around Rs.45.00 Crores. In the process, the Registration Department has been cheated. In the event of the property being sold in the open market, it would have garnered money in the form of taxes to the State Government. However, the accused had transferred the property in the name of A7, thereby com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n cognizance of the offence punishable under sections 120- B, 406, 408, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A IPC against A1 to A9. Register as C.C.No.6229/2022. Issue summons to A1 to A9 through court and R.P on payment of process. Call on 17.10.2022. 7. This Court in the Common Order dated 28.02.2023 in Criminal Petition Nos.439 and 545 of 2023, quashed the proceedings on 28.02.2023 finding that taking cognizance against the accused was not in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the cases of; i) Sunil Bharti Mittal v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2015) 4 Supreme Court Cases 609) ; ii) Fakhruddin Ahmad v. State of Uttaranchal and another (2008) 17 Supreme Court Cases 157 ; iii) Deepak Gaba and others ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ey laundering against him or any one claiming such property being the property linked to stated scheduled offence through him. 9. On the other hand, Sri A.R.L.Sundaresan, learned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing for learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for the respondent-Enforcement directorate, would submit that the operative portion of this Court s order indicates that the proceedings against A1 to A3 and A9 have only been quashed and that in the said circumstances, when the proceedings are pending against the other accused for the predicate offence, the proceedings against this petitioner cannot be quashed. 10. This Court in Criminal Petition Nos.439 and 545 of 2023, held at para 16 as follows: 16. The H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
