SARLA GUPTA Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the instant writ petitions, the petitioners seek setting aside of the common order dated 30.03.2019 passed by the ld. Special Judge (PC Act), CBI-05, PHC, whereby, the respective applications filed by the petitioners seeking supply of deficient/illegible documents detailed there-under, came to be dismissed.

(2.) Concisely, the facts relevant to the subject matter are that on the registration of an FIR dated 05.07.2017 for the alleged contravention of Section 120-B r/w Section 420 IPC and Section 13(i)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act in short 'the PC Act' - charge-sheets in respect whereof have been filed - the respondent Directorate of Enforcement recorded an Enforcement Case Information Report i.e. ECIR on 26.07.2017, and, thereby, initiated investigations under Section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 in short 'PMLA' against Lara Projects LLP (erstwhile Delight Marketing Company Pvt. Ltd./DMCPL) and its Director(s)/Shareholders; attachment proceedings under Section 5 of PMLA; and; also, filed a criminal complaint under Section 3 r/w Section 4 of PMLA inter alia against the petitioners. In the proceedings so initiated, the petitioners filed the subject applications, which came to be dismissed vide the impugned order. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioners have preferred the instant writ petitions.

(3.) In W.P. (Crl.) 1319/2019 the impugned order is assailed on the plea that the proceedings before the ld. Special Judge in PMLA are governed by the provisions of Cr.P.C. and require strict compliance of Section 208 Cr.P.C. According to the said petitioners, the documents supplied by the respondent run into eight volumes with 3535 pages and on a preliminary scrutiny, it was revealed that there were deficiencies and certain documents had not come to be supplied. In continuation thereof, it is also urged that any further investigation and filing of supplementary complaint is not permissible in law. In W.P. (Crl.) 1164/2019, the petitioners plead that on the preliminary scrutiny of the documents relied upon and supplied by the respondent, the documents detailed in the application were found deficient besides few documents being not legible and therefore, the application made under Section 207 Cr.P.C. was required to be granted.