PRAKASH INDUSTRIES LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions raise an important question relating to the powers of the Enforcement Directorate[ED] to provisionally attach properties under Sec. 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 [The Act] even though no proceedings relating to the predicate offense may have been initiated by the competent agency functioning under an independent statute and in terms of which the scheduled offense stands created. The ancillary and yet equally fundamental issue which the Court is called upon to answer is whether the ED could be recognised to have the jurisdiction to enforce the measures contemplated in Sec. 5 of the Act solely upon it being of the opinion that the material gathered in the course of an investigation or enquiry evidences the commission of a predicate offense. The questions posited would also raise the ancillary issue of the powers that the ED could be recognised to derive from the Act while investigating an offense of money laundering.

(2.) The writ petitions principally assail the action taken by the ED which had proceeded to pass a Provisional Attachment Order[PAO/Provisional Attachment Order] dtd. 29/11/2018. W.P.(C) 13361/2018 came to be instituted on or about 9/12/2018 and at a time when the petitioner was yet to be served with the PAO. The connected writ petition directly assails the order of 29/11/2018 noticed above. The proceedings drawn by the ED emanate from a First Information Report[FIR] bearing RC No. 219 2014 E-0002 dtd. 26/3/2014 registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation[CBI]and ECIR No. 3 of 2014 which came to be lodged on 29/12/2014 by the respondent. During the pendency of the instant writ petitions, ED also proceeded to file a separate complaint referable to Sec. 45 of the Act and on which further investigation is still stated to be continuing. Similar is the position insofar as the ECIR is concerned.

(3.) Turning firstly to the proceedings on the FIR registered at the behest of the CBI, the record would bear out that a Closure Report was submitted before the competent court on 30/8/2014. A protest petition came to be filed by the complainants thereafter on 2/11/2016. Upon the aforesaid protest petition coming to be filed, a prayer was made before the competent court for CBI being accorded permission to conduct further investigation. On the conclusion of that investigation, a chargesheet came to be filled before the competent court on 17/11/2021 against the petitioner and other named accused. The competent court took cognizance on the aforesaid chargesheet in terms of its order of 31/1/2022 and issued summons against the named accused.