Gauhati High Court
Nur Mohammad vs Enforcement Directorate Govt. Of ... on 11 February, 2022
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010019692022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./47/2022
NUR MOHAMMAD
S/O LATE BARKAT ULLAH
R/O HOUSE NO. 4, SHANTIPUR HILL SIDE, MASJID ROAD, P.S.
BHARALUMUKH, GUWAHATI-781009, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM
VERSUS
ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE GOVT. OF INDIA
TO BE REP. BY THE PP, E.D.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K N CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ED
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
ORDER
Date : 11.02.2022
This application under Section 401 read with 482 Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the
Constitution of India is preferred by Nur Mohammad challenging the illegality, propriety and
correctness of the order dated 22.12.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, Assam in
Special (PMLA) Case No.22/2018.
It is to be noted that vide impugned order, the learned Court below has framed charge
against the petitioner under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and also heard Ms.
Page No.# 2/3
A. Gayan, learned Standing Counsel, ED and also perused the petition and the documents
placed on record.
Let notice be issued, returnable on 10.03.2022.
Since Ms. A. Gayan, learned Standing Counsel, ED has entered appearance and has
received notice, no formal notice is required to be issued. However, extra copies of the
petition be furnished to Ms. Gayan, learned Standing Counsel, ED during the course of the
day.
Let the scanned copy of the record along with the case diary be called from the
learned Court below.
Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the petitioner referring to Article 20(1)
of the Constitution of India and also to Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act,
2002 submits the offence was allegedly committed by the petitioner when the Act itself has
not been amended so as constitute the offence alleged and Article 20(1) of the Constitution
of India prohibit the same and that further proceedings before the learned Court below may
be stayed.
On the other hand, Ms. Gayan, learned Standing Counsel, ED has objected in staying
the further proceedings pending before the learned Court below, citing several judgments of
the different High Courts.
Having heard the submission of the learned Advocates of both sides, I have gone
through the relevant provision of law and the judgments cited by learned Standing Counsel,
ED and I find sufficient force in the submission of Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel
for the petitioner, which is not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.
When the offence was allegedly committed by the petitioner, the provision of Section 3 was
not amended to cover the same. And conviction and sentence in criminal proceeding is
prohibited under ex-facto law by Article 20(1) of the Constitution of India.
However, considering the submission of learned counsel of both sides and also
considering the facts and circumstances on record, it is provided that further proceedings of
Special (PMLA) Case No. 22/2018 pending before the Court of learned Special Judge, Assam,
Guwahati, so far the present petitioner is concerned shall remain stayed till the next
Page No.# 3/3
returnable date.
List the matter again on 10.03.2022.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
