PARVATHI Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/accused No.2 in Crime No.11 of 2024 is standing at the doors of this Court challenging registration of Enforcement Case Information Report ('ECIR' for short) against the petitioner arising out of predicate offence in Crime No.11 of 2024 registered by the Karnataka Lokayukta Police.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, facts in brief germane are as follows:-

(3.) Pursuant to the dismissal of the challenge as afore-noticed, the concerned Court directs registration of a First Information Report ('FIR') to investigate into the offence as obtaining under Sec. 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. The investigation is directed to be conducted by the Police wing of the Karnataka Lokayukta. Therefore, FIR in Crime No.11 of 2024 comes to be registered against the Chief Minister, the present petitioner and others. The issue in the lis does not pertain to the merit of the crime so registered in Crime No.11 of 2024. Four days after registration of crime, two events happen on the said day i.e., on 1/10/2024. On 1/10/2024 the present petitioner who was the recipient of fourteen sites from Mysore Urban Development Authority ('MUDA' for short) as compensation for acquisition of land belonging to the petitioner had returned those sites to MUDA and a deed of cancellation of allotment is executed on the same day. On the said day, the impugned ECIR comes to be registered by the Enforcement Directorate. After registration of ECIR, summons comes to be issued against the petitioner directing appearance before the Enforcement Directorate in terms of summons dtd. 3/1/2025. It is at that juncture the petitioner knocks at the doors of this Court calling in question registration of crime and consequent act of issuance of summons under Sec. 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 ('the Act' for short).