Wednesday, 15, May, 2024
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

S.Jagathrakshakan vs The Deputy Director
2022 Latest Caselaw 17087 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 17087 Mad
Judgement Date : 1 November, 2022

Madras High Court
S.Jagathrakshakan vs The Deputy Director on 1 November, 2022
                                                                               Writ Petition No.10854 of 2020

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED: 01.11.2022

                                                            Coram

                               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH
                                                 and
                            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN

                                                Writ Petition No.10854 of 2020
                                                              and
                                                  W.M.P.No.13179 of 2020

                     S.Jagathrakshakan
                     S/o.Swamikannu Gounder                                       ... Petitioner

                                                              Vs.

                     The Deputy Director,
                     Directorate of Enforcement,
                     2nd and 3rd Floor,
                     Murugesa Naicker Complex,
                     84, Greams Road,
                     Thousand Lights, Chennai - 600 006.                          ... Respondent



                                  Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
                     seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the
                     impugned order passed by the respondent in his proceedings in
                     ECIR/05/CEZO-II/2019 dated 12.06.2020 initiated by the respondent and
                     quash the same as illegal, without jurisdiction and arbitrary.



                      1/7



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                              Writ Petition No.10854 of 2020

                                       For Petitioner   :     Mr.C.Manishankar, Senior Counsel
                                                              for Mr.N.Senthil Kumar

                                       For Respondent   :      Mr.R.Sankaranarayanan
                                                               Additional Solicitor General
                                                               for Mr.Rajinish Pathiyil,
                                                               Special Public Prosecutor [ED]
                                                            *****

                                                         ORDER

[Made by P.N.PRAKASH, J.]

Seeking to quash the order passed by the respondent in his

proceedings in ECIR/05/CEZO-II/2019 dated 12.06.2020, the present

petition has been filed.

2. The minimum facts that are required for deciding this quash

petition are as under:

(i) On a complaint given by one Quentin Dawson as Power of Attorney of

George Joseph Chambers, the Central Crime Branch registered a case in

Crime Nos.304 and 305 of 2007 against the petitioner and others for the

offences u/s.120(B), 420, 465, 467 and 471 IPC.

(ii)After completing investigation, the Central Crime Branch filed a closure

report in Crime Nos.304 and 305 of 2007 on the ground of mistake of

2/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.10854 of 2020

fact. The closure report was also accepted by the learned Judicial

Magistrate I, Poonamallee, on 23.12.2009. The CBCID, Chennai, filed an

application in Crime Nos.304 and 305 of 2007 for further investigation,

which came to be dismissed by the learned Judicial Magistrate I,

Chengalpattu, on 26.02.2014.

(iii)Challenging the order, the CBCID approached the Additional District

and Sessions Court, Chengalpattu, in Crl.R.C.Nos.4 and 5 of 2014, in

which, by order dated 11.08.2016, the order of the learned Judicial

Magistrate I, Chengalpattu, was set aside and the CBCID was allowed to

proceed with the further investigation. Accordingly, the cases in Crime

Nos.304 and 305 of 2007 were transferred from the file of Central Crime

Branch to CBCID and re-numbered as Crime Nos.2 and 3 of 2016.

(iv)The petitioner herein filed quash petitions in Crl.O.P.Nos.12985 and

12986 of 2020 before this Court for quashing the First Information

Reports in Crime Nos.2 and 3 of 2016. While so, since the First

Information Reports disclosed commission of a scheduled offence under

the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, the Enforcement Directorate

registered a case in ECIR/05/CEZO-II/2019 and issued summons dated

3/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.10854 of 2020

12.06.2022 to the petitioner u/s.50 of the Prevention of Money

Laundering Act for his appearance, challenging which, the petitioner filed

the present writ petition.

3. While so, when the matter was taken up for hearing, both sides

represented that this Court has allowed Crl.O.P.Nos.12985 and 12986 of

2020 on 23.09.2022 quashing the two First Information Reports in CBCID

Crime Nos.2 and 3 of 2016.

4. In the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Vijay

Madanlal Choudhary and others v. Union of India and others 1, the

learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for quashment of the proceedings

before the Enforcement Directorate.

5. It may be apposite to extract paragraph No.467(d) from the

judgment of the Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal's case [supra]:

467 (d) The offence under Section 3 of the 2002 Act is dependent on illegal gain of property as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. It is concerning the process or activity 1 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929

4/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.10854 of 2020

connected with such property, which constitutes the offence of money-laundering. The Authorities under the 2002 Act cannot prosecute any person on notional basis or on the assumption that a scheduled offence has been committed, unless it is so registered with the jurisdictional police and/or pending enquiry/trial including by way of criminal complaint before the competent forum. If the person is finally discharged/acquitted of the scheduled offence or the criminal case against him is quashed by the Court of competent jurisdiction, there can be no offence of money-laundering against him or any one claiming such property being the property linked to stated scheduled offence through him."

(emphasis supplied)

In the light of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed and impugned

order passed by the respondent in his proceedings in ECIR/05/CEZO-

II/2019 dated 12.06.2020, is quashed. No costs. Consequently, connected

miscellaneous petition is closed.

                                                                             [PNP, J.]         [TKR, J.]
                                                                                     01.11.2022
                     Index: Yes/No
                     gm

                     To
                     1.The Deputy Director,
                       Directorate of Enforcement,

2nd and 3rd Floor, Murugesa Naicker Complex, 84, Greams Road, Thousand LIghts, Chennai - 600 006.

2.The Special Public Prosecutor [ED], High Court, Madras.

5/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.10854 of 2020

P.N.PRAKASH, J.

and RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

gm

Writ Petition No.10854 of 2020

01.11.2022

6/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.10854 of 2020

7/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 
 
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2024

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2024', Apply Now!

 
 
 
 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

Publish Your Article

Campus Ambassador

Media Partner

Campus Buzz