INDRANI PATNAIK Vs. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has referred to the Judgment delivered by this Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.decided on 27/7/2022, wherein the consequence of failure of prosecution for the scheduled offence has been provided in the following terms;-

(2.) Learned senior counsel has submitted that in the present case, prosecution of the petitioners in relation to the scheduled offence, on which the proceedings under the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2022 (PMLA) were based, have already come to an end with the petitioners having been discharged from V.G.R. Case No. 59 of 2009(T.R. Case No. 80 of 2011) by the order dtd. 27/11/2020, as passed by the High Court of Orissa in Criminal Revision No. 831 of 2018. Learned counsel would submit that in the given state of facts and the law declared by this Court, there cannot be any prosecution for the alleged offence of money-laundering in relation to the said offence for which, the petitioners have already been discharged.

(3.) Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents though has not disputed the order dtd. 27/11/2020 passed by the High Court, discharging the petitioners from the scheduled offence but has submitted that he has not received further instructions as to whether the prosecuting agency has challenged the said order or not. The record as it stands today, the petitioners stand discharged of the scheduled offence and therefore, in view of the law declared by this Court, there could arise no question of they being prosecuted for illegal gain of property as a result of the criminal activity relating to the alleged scheduled offence.