Sikkim High Court

Directorate Of Enforcement vs M/S Valley Distributors Llp And Ors on 21 August, 2025

Author: Bhaskar Raj Pradhan

Bench: Bhaskar Raj Pradhan

                                                           Court No.3

                       HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM
                          Record of proceedings

                     CRL. REV. P. No.06 of 2024

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT                          ....... PETITIONER

                       VERSUS

M/S VALLEY DISTRIBUTORS LLP & ORS.
                                                  ....... RESPONDENTS
Date: 21.08.2025

CORAM :

          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHASKAR RAJ PRADHAN, J.

For Petitioner : Ms. Sangita Pradhan, Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Ms. Natasha Pradhan and Ms. Sittal Balmiki, Advocates. For Respondent : Mr. Sudesh Joshi, Advocate. Nos. 1 to 3. Mr. Adarsh Gurung, Advocate. Nos. 4 to 6. : Mr. Rahul Rathi, Advocate.

Ms. Khushboo Rathi, Advocate.

Ms. Rupal Agarwal, Advocate.

............

1. During the course of hearing as we-the Judge as well as the

counsel attempt to navigate through the 4 volumes of paper-

books prepared by the Registry, soon realise the impossibility of

doing so.

2. This is a criminal revision petition preferred by the

petitioner against an impugned order of discharge dated

30.04.2024, passed by the learned Special Judge (PMLA),

Gangtok (for short "the learned Special Judge") allowing the

application filed by the respondents under section 227 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.").

3. Part-B (b) of the High Court of Sikkim, Practice and

Procedure Rules deals with "Presentation of Memorandum of

Appeal or Petitions for Revision in Criminal Cases and Certain

other Criminal Matters" (for short "the PP Rules").

Court No.3

HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM Record of proceedings

4. For the convenience of the Registry the relevant rules are

extracted herein below:-

"47. Statement with regard to appeal or revision:-

In every criminal appeal or revision application, the appellant or petitioner shall state that no such appeal or revision application in the same matter has previously been filed and without that statement such appeal or revision application shall not be accepted.

48. 'Copies of lower Courts' order to accompany petition for revision:-

(1) Every petition for revision of an order shall be accompanied by a copy of the order in respect of which such application is made.

(2) In the case of petition for revision of the order of an appellate Court, a copy of the order of first instance shall also be filed.

xxxxxx

55. Paper-book in criminal revision and reference:-

(1) The paper-book in Criminal Revision shall consist of:-

(i) The judgment or order of the trial court;

(ii) The petition of revision.

(2) The paper book of criminal reference shall consist of the letter of reference and any other relevant documents.

(3) The paper book shall be prepared by the parties concerned, or the Registry, as may be directed by the court."

5. When this Court had directed preparation of the paper-

books on 29.08.2024, the Registry ought to have followed the PP

Rules and it was incumbent upon the learned counsel for the

parties to be mindful of that before making a statement to this

Court on 26.09.2024, that they find no errors therein.

Court No.3

HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM Record of proceedings

6. As stated earlier, the paper-books are in 4 volumes. A

perusal of the index prepared for each of the volumes reflects a

total non application of mind. Neither this Court, nor the learned

counsel for the parties is able to find the relevant documents as

it is scattered in 4 volumes along with irrelevant documents. The

learned Deputy Solicitor General of India submits that many of

these documents were documents filed by the respondents in the

Trial Court. Mr. Sudesh Joshi, learned counsel representing

respondent nos. 1 to 3 submits that although these documents

were filed, they were not considered by the learned Special

Judge. From the 4 volumes of the paper-books it is nearly

impossible to find out which these documents are.

7. A copy of the complaint filed under section 44 and 45 of the

Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (for short "the PMLA

Act, 2002") appears in the Volume-1 at sl. no.1. This is relevant

and ought to be considered. The learned Deputy Solicitor General

of India submits that the complaint was accompanied by various

documents indexed in Annexure A along with list of witnesses as

Annexure B, which is at sl. nos. 3 and 4. However, the

documents mentioned in Annexure A are not filed along with the

index but in other volumes. Similarly, although the index of list

of witnesses (Annexure B) is at pages 52 to 53, the statements of

these witnesses are not found along with the index.

8. Volume-2 consists of pages 323 to 749, however the index

is short and sweet consisting of only two items i.e. "12. Index by

accused no.1 and document. 13. Documents vol-I."

Court No.3

HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM Record of proceedings

9. Similarly, Volume-3 consists of pages 750 to 1195 but the

index again is only "14. Document vol-II. 15. Document vol-III."

10. The index for Volume-4, which consists of pages 1196 to

1500 provides "16. Document vol-IV. 17. Copy of order dated

05.01.2023. 18. Order sheets passed in STPMLA Case No. 01 of

2024. 19. Memo of appeal."

11. In terms of the relevant PP Rules, what was required to be

done by the Registry in preparing the paper-books is clearly

reflected in the relevant rules quoted above.

12. The index to the revision petition filed by the petitioner

before this Court consists of: the synopsis and the list of dates

and events; the revision petition along with affidavit; the

prosecution complaint no. ST (PMLA) 01 of 2023 filed under

section 45 read with section 44 of the PMLA, 2002; and a

certified copy of the impugned judgment and order dated

30.04.2024. The complaint filed as Annexure P1 at pages 27 to

79 includes: the complaint between pages 27 to 65; the index of

documents relied upon by the petitioner (Annexure A) between

pages 66 to 69 and Annexure B thereafter is the index of the list

of witnesses sought to be examined by the petitioner at pages 70

to 71. Neither the documents mentioned in Annexure A nor the

statements indexed in Annexure B are available in the revision

petition as well.

13. On perusal of the complaint, it is noticed that it does not

mention any annexures to it. However, the learned Deputy

Solicitor General submits that Annexure A in volume 1 at page Court No.3

HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM Record of proceedings

48 is the index to the documents described therein relied upon

by the petitioner before the learned Special Judge and Annexure

B is the list of witnesses of the petitioner.

14. The learned counsel appearing for the parties jointly submit

that the paper-books prepared in 4 volumes needs to be revised.

15. The learned Deputy Solicitor General of India is, therefore

requested to get proper instructions from her client and take all

such necessary steps to clarify these issues and ensure that the

paper-books are prepared afresh by the Registry with only the

relevant documents placed before the learned Special Judge by

them.

16. This Court is of the view that the following documents

would be relevant for preparation of the paper-books:-

1. The judgment and order of the learned Special Judge dated 30.04.2024.

2. The petition for revision along with the Annexures thereto.

3. The prosecution Complaint no. ST (PMLA) 01 of 2023 filed under section 45 read with section 44 of the PMLA, 2002 along with all documents/statements filed therewith.