SABU K.S. Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sabu K.S, who is the accused in C.C.No.3/2014, pending before the Special CBI Court-I, Ernakulam, has filed this transfer petition under Sec. 447 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ('BNSS' for short hereafter). The prayer in the petition is to transfer the entire records in C.C.No.3/2014 pending before the Special CBI Court-I, Ernakulam to Special CBI Court-II, Ernakulam, where the case pertaining to the predicate offences, i.e offences under Sec. 13(1)(e) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('PC Act, 1988' for short), numbered as S.C.No.329/2017, has been pending, for consideration of the same simultaneously by the same Judge. Sabu K.S is the sole accused in S.C.No.329/2017 also.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent (CBI) and the learned Standing Counsel representing the Directorate of Enforcement of Cochin Zonal Office, in detail. Perused the relevant provisions.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Annexure A final report (pertaining to C.C.No.3/2014) was filed alleging commission of scheduled offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act ('PML Act' for short) and Annexure B is the complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate against the petitioner alleging commission of offences punishable under Ss. 3 and 4 of the PML Act. According to the learned counsel, the allegations in Annexures A and B are almost same and interconnected, and the witnesses to be examined and documents to be marked are one and the same. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Special Court, CBI-II, Ernakulam, is also a Special Court for the trial of cases under the PC Act as well as the PML Act and hence transfer of Annexure A final report pending before the Special Court CBI-I, Ernakulam, to the Special Court CBI-II, Ernakulam, where Annexure B complaint alleging offences under the PML Act is pending, is necessary to protect the interest of the accused, so that both the cases have to be tried by one court.