LOKESH Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have challenged the order dtd. 9/2/2021 passed by the XLVII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge for CBI Cases at Bengaluru (CCH No.48) in Spl.CC.No.77/2011, by which it rejected an application filed by the petitioners under Sec. 245(2) read with Sec. 227 of Cr.P.C.

(2.) The short facts required to discern the dispute in issue are that the respondent initiated prosecution of the petitioners by a complaint under Sec. 45(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. It was claimed in the complaint that the petitioner No.1 was accused of certain schedule offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act in various Police Stations in Crime No.274/2005 at Yelahanka Police Station, Crime No.152/2007 at Hulimavu Police Station, Crime No.451/2008 at Rajagopalnagar Police Station, Crime No.196/2009 at Rajarajeshwarinagar Police Station and Crime No.740/2009 at Kamakshipalya Police Station. It was accused that the petitioner No.1 had utilized the proceeds of the crime to purchase certain properties. It was alleged that accused No.2 being the wife of accused No.1 had purchased certain properties in her name and she claimed that she had raised money from accused Nos.3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 to purchase the properties.

(3.) It is stated that the accused No.1 was acquitted of the offence mentioned above and therefore, he filed an application for discharge in Spl.CC.No.77/2011. The said application was rejected by the Trial Court on the ground that the acquittal of the petitioner No.1/accused No.1 in the criminal cases was inconsequential and proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act can continue against the petitioners.