Economic offences cannot be quashed at the investigation stage based on an agreement between the parties, as per the interpretation of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and relevant case law.

JUDGMENT

Dhiraj Singh Thakur, CJ. - In all the four aforementioned writ appeals, since common questions of law and fact arise, we propose to deal with them by way of a common order.

For purposes of convenience, reference shall be made to facts contained in W.A.No.967 of 2023.

2. The present Writ Appeal No.967 of 2023 has been filed in terms of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the judgment and order dated 09.08.2023 passed in W.P.No.18057 of 2023, whereby the writ Court while exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has quashed the impugned ECIR dated 31.05.2022, the Provisional Attachment Order No.1/2023, dated 10.05.2023 and the Original Complaint No.1996/2023, dated 08.06.2023, in terms of the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'PMLA, 2002') and has further directed release of all the seized property, material and documents.

3. Investigation under PMLA, 2002 came to be initiated vide ECIR/VKSZO/027/2022, dated 31.05.2022, against the respondents herein and officials of M/s. NRI Academy of Sciences which is a Society registered under the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 2001'), on the basis of two FIRs bearing Crime No.85 of 2021, dated 03.03.2021 for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 120B r/w Section 34 of IPC and Crime No.346 of 2021 dated 19.06.2021 for offences punishable under Sections 120B, 409, 471, 420 and 506 of IPC registered at Mangalagiri police station.

4. Since the dispute primarily involved the control over the management of the NRI Academy of Sciences which was running a one thousand bedded hospital including medical colleges and nursing homes, a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 22.02.2022 passed in W.A.Nos.234 of 2022 and batch, held that the Society was registered under the provisions of the Act, 2001, Section 23 whereof dealt with the dispute regarding management arising among the committee or the members of the Society in respect of the matters relating to the affairs of the Society etc., the same could not be gone into in writ proceedings and therefore, referred the same for adjudication, with the consent of the parties to a sole Arbitrator in terms of the said Section 23 of the Act, 2001. The order dated 22.02.2022, passed by the Division Bench also recorded the agreement of the counsel for the parties that all pending litigations in relation to the subject dispute before any legal fora/Courts would be withdrawn by the respective parties.

5. In the backdrop of the aforementioned developments, petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing Crl.P.No.2341 of 2023 and Crl.P.No.1398 of 2023, came to be filed for quashing the proceedings in Crime No.85 of 2021 for offences under Sections 420, 406, 120B r/w Section 34 IPC and in Crime No.346 of 2021 for offences under Sections 120B, 409, 471, 420, 506 IPC both the FIRs registered with Mangalagiri Rural Police Station, respectively. In these petitions, it was urged that the complainant in Crime Nos.85/2021 and 346/2021 was a member of the NRI Academy of Sciences and that the said FIRs had been registered on account of the disputes between the rival groups for control over the management of the Society. Reference was made to the judgment and order dated 22.02.2022, passed in W.A.Nos.234 of 2022 and batch and therefore, made a prayer that the FIRs in question be quashed. An affidavit also appears to have been filed by the complainant in the aforementioned proceedings before the learned single Judge tendering his unconditional consent for quashing of the FIRs. Based upon the aforementioned facts which were placed before the learned single Judge, the proceedings in regard to Crime No.85/2021 and 346/2021 were quashed without going into the merits of the cases.

6. The W.P.No.18057 of 2023, came to be filed by respondent No.1 herein challenging the proceedings initiated by the appellants herein under the pr