Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ARUN KUMAR JHA
Pushpraj Bajaj, S/O Late Shyam Sundar Bajaj – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through the Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ARUN KUMAR JHA, J.
1. This interlocutory application has been filed for condoning the delay of about 88 days in preferring this revision application.
2. For the reasons mentioned in this interlocutory application, I am satisfied that the petitioner was prevented from sufficient cause in preferring this revision application within time.
3. Accordingly, this interlocutory application is allowed and the delay in filing this revision application is hereby condoned.
Cr. Revison No.685 of 2025
4. The instant criminal revision has been filed under Sections 438 read with Section 442 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ BNSS ’) seeking setting aside of the order dated 08.01.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (PMLA), Patna (hereinafter referred to as ‘the learned Special Court’) in Special Trial No. (PMLA) 10/2024 along with proceedings emanating therefrom, whereby and whereunder the learned Special Court has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 3 & 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘PMLA’) against the petitioner and others.
5. Brief facts of the case are t
A magistrate must adhere to procedural safeguards, including providing the accused a hearing before taking cognizance, as mandated by Section 223 of BNSS; failure to comply renders the cognizance ord....
The denial of an opportunity for a hearing before taking cognizance vitiates the cognizance order and subsequent proceedings under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, constituting a violation of ....
The court emphasized that under Section 223(1) of BNSS, a Magistrate must examine the complainant and provide the accused an opportunity to be heard before taking cognizance of an offence.
The court established that a right to hearing under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita applies, requiring courts to afford such hearing before taking cognizance of offences against the accused.
The court upheld that cognizance is taken of the offence rather than the offender, enabling supplementary complaints without violating prior hearing mandates, confirming no sanction under Section 197....
A Magistrate must examine the complainants and witnesses before issuing notices to the accused under Section 223(1) of BNSS, 2023, ensuring compliance with procedural mandates.
Cognizance of offences – Notice is to be issued to accused only after examination of Complainant and present witnesses.
The court established that a magistrate must provide an opportunity for the accused to be heard before taking cognizance of criminal complaints, ensuring adherence to procedural justice under Section....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
