TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1453X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titioner had been guilty of an offence punishable under Section 4 read with Section 3 of the PML Act. Thus, none of the contentions raised by the Petitioner to challenge his arrest as illegal holds merit. As a result, the Petitioner has failed to show that his arrest is wholly illegal, null and void and that the Special Court had passed the Remand Order mechanically without application of mind. His petition for Habeas Corpus cannot be maintainable. Hence, this is not a fit case either to admit, much less, to grant the relief. Order passed separately, signed and dated. - P.K. Jaiswal And Rajeev Kumar Dubey, JJ. For the Appellant : Isha Goyal, Learned Counsel For the Respondent : Deepak Rawal, Learned Asstt. Solicitor Gene ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of the Petitioner. On 13.5.2017 learned Special Court further granted judicial custody of the petitioner accused and also ordered detention of petitioner. Being aggrieved by these orders petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3. Petitioner's contention is that there is no procedure prescribed under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (for short hereinafter refer as PMLA ) for investigation of the offences. According to section 65 of The PMLA procedure prescribed under Code of Criminal Procedure (for short hereinafter referred as the Code) is required to be followed, while investigating the offence under PMLA. In Writ Petition No. 4336/2015 filed by the petitioner this Court directed the respondents to carry out the investigation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pecial Court after hearing petitioner and following the provisions of Code gave remand of petitioner for ten days on being satisfied that the arrest made is legal and in accordance with the provisions of Code and constitutional rights of the petitioner is satisfied and the same is reflecting in the order dated 3.5.2017 granting remand for ten days. When judicial custody of the petitioner was granted by the Special Court by order dated 3.5.2017 then it cannot be said that the petitioner is in illegal custody. Petitioner is not in wrongful confinement so petition is not maintainable. Hence this petition be rejected. 5. This Court has gone through the record and the arguments put forth by the learned counsels of both the parties. Petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... formed of the grounds for such arrest. Therefore, unless something contrary is produced on record, it has to be presumed that the Petitioner was informed of the grounds of arrest. It is also mentioned in the order that petitioner was heard and case file was examined. It is alleged that the petitioner Director of Zoom Developers Co. Ltd. had committed a fraud with more than 25 Banks, Fraudulently utilized an amount more than Rs. 2650 crores of 25 banks took above mentioned public money out of the country and formed illegal companies and purchased the properties and liquidated the money which shows that at the time of remand case file (Diary) was produced by the respondent before special court and special court after hearing both the parties ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 71 of the PML Act clearly lays down that, the provisions of this Act shall have effect, notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force . Section 65 of PML Act further makes the position clear by stating that, the provisions of the code shall apply, only if they are not inconsistent with the provisions of PML Act, even as regards arrest, search and seizure, attachment, confiscation, investigation, prosecution and all other proceedings under the PML Act . Therefore, if PML Act contains certain provisions relating to arrest, then, the PML Act being a complete Code in itself and also being a special law enacted with a particular object, in view of Section 5 of the Code, the prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h are laid down under Section 19 of PML Act, pertain to the reasonable belief of the authority, which is on the basis of the material in its possession. As a result, when there are no such restrictions on the power to arrest , as laid down under Section 19 of PML Act, it cannot be accepted that the officer authorized to arrest under the PML Act was, in addition to the procedure laid down in PML Act, expected to follow the procedure laid down in the code also, of registering FIR or seeking permission of the Court in respect of non-cognizable offence for arrest of the accused under this Act. If those provisions of Chapter XII of the Code are to be read even in respect of these offences, then, it follows that Section 19 of PML Act would be re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
