JANATA JHA Vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Misc. Case has been filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the proceeding under section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, 'the PMLA') initiated against the petitioners by the Opp. party No. 1 vide Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) No. 14 of 2010 on the ground that the said proceeding is not only illegal and arbitrary, but also without jurisdiction in view of section 5(1) proviso (i) of the PMLA as well as for quashing of all consequential proceedings. On the basis of letter No. 503/SR dated 9.4.2010 of the Superintendent of Police, Keonjhar forwarding a copy of an FIR filed under sections 307/357/387 IPC read with sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 along with the copies of the seizure reports and statements of prosecution witnesses recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. relating to the petitioners, addressed to the Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Bhubaneswar, it being found that the petitioner No. 2 was involved in large scale smuggling of iron ores and acquired huge properties through illegal means and also through extortion by the concerned Investigating Officer, the petitioner No. 2 was arrested by the Barbil police and was detained under N.S.A. being lodged in Keonjhar Jail. Pursuant to an order passed by this Court, the Opp. party No. 1 interrogated the accused--petitioner No. 2 in jail custody on 22.5.2010 in presence of the Superintendent of Keonjhar District Jail. Finding that the offences under sections 307/387 IPC as well as under sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act 1959 are scheduled offences under the PMLA (as amended), the Directorate of Enforcement, Bhubaneswar registered the ECIR bearing No. 14/BBSR/2010 dated 8.5.2010 against the petitioner No. 2 for initiating action under PMLA. Investigation was taken up under the said Act and it was found out during the investigation that the accused petitioner No. 2 had accounts in various Banks at Barbil, where huge amounts have been deposited. Account was also opened in the name of the petitioner No. 1. Details of the bank accounts were collected from the respective banks which reflected the multiple entries showing huge transaction of money in the name of the petitioners. According to the Investigating Agency, none of the petitioners apparently had any legal source of income. The Banks were requested by the Assistant Director not to allow any debit from those accounts for smooth conduct of the investigation under the PMLA. Summons in terms of section 50 of the PMLA were issued pursuant to which witnesses were examined regarding criminal activities of the petitioner No. 2.

(2.) The retention of the said amount in different bank accounts of the petitioners has been confirmed by the adjudicating authority under the PMLA, New Delhi on 23.9.2010 in O.C. No. 54 of 2010 after hearing both the parties. The Income Tax authorities have also seized the amount lying in the accounts of petitioner No. 2 on 4.6.2010 for initiation of proceedings under the provisions of the Income Tax Act for which the amounts could not be seized under the PMLA at that point of time. Huge amounts have been deposited also in the name of the sons of the petitioners which have been found out during investigation and have been confirmed by the adjudicating authority under the Act in O.C. No. 96 of 2011 after hearing both the parties.

(3.) The present application, as stated earlier, has been filed to quash ECIR No. 14 of 2010.