ORDER :

1. The petitioners have filed WPCR No. 180/2021 and vide order dated 07.06.2021, this court has stated that:

“In view of the matter, instead of proceeding further, two weeks time is granted to learned counsel for the petitioners to make the record straight if they are so advised.”

2. In compliance of the said order, the petitioners have filed amended writ petition W.P. (Cr.) No. 478/2021 and by this order, both the petitions are being heard and disposed of as they both arise out of the issue regarding powers of the authorities pertaining to summon, production of documents and to give evidence under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

3. The petitioners have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the summons dated 19.07.2021 under Section 50(2) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002 (in short the PMLA Act) and non-grant of copy of Enforcement Case Information Report (in short the ECIR) to the petitioners whereby the respondents have been registered ECIR No. ECIR/RPSZO/06/2020/401 against the petitioner No. 1.

4. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners have filed this petition on the ground that they have been served with the impugned summons dated 19.07.2021 directing them to appear personally and produce the documents by the respondent No. 2 exercising powers under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The petitioners are required to produce the documents in the case of the petitioner No. 1 with whom the petitioner No. 2 & 3 have no business or any monetary relations. The petitioner have made separate applications before the respondent No. 2 for grant of copy of the ECIR but the same has not been given. In the month of February, respondent No. 2 issued similar summons to the petitioners without supplying copy and time to file reply. Petitioners preferred a writ petition before this Court vide W.P. (Cr) No. 180/2021 seeking direction from this court to the respondents to provide copy of ECIR and reasonable time to file reply. The aforesaid writ petition was heard at length and at one point of time was also reserved for judgment but the matter was released vide order dated 07.06.2021. Now the respondents have issued fresh summons on 19.07.2021 rendering the earlier writ petition academic and hence, the present petition has been by the petitioners through this petition. Petitioners have demanded the copy of ECIR from the respondents for proper reply and preparation of the same.

5. Contention of counsel for the petitioner is that the copy of the ECIR is necessary for their reply but the same has not been given denying the rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 20(2) of the Constitution of India. The petitioners have also been denied legal representation and personal presence has been enforced by the impugned summons which is also contrary to the right to fair trial as held by the Apex Court in the matter of Subedar vs. State of U.P. 2020 SCC Online SC 1084. He further submits that in the matter of Youth Bar Association vs. Union of India, (2016) 9 SCC 473 it has been held by the Apex Court that the accused is entitled for copy of the FIR before the consonance of fair trial as prescribed under Section 207 Cr.P.C. when the charge sheet is submitted before the trial court and cognizance is taken. The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code have been made applicable to the investigation including trial under the PMLA by way of Sections 65, 44 to 46 of the PMLA. The Apex Court in the case of Ashok Munnilal Jain vs. Directorate of Enforcement, (2018) 16 SCC 158 has held that the provisions of Criminal Procedure Code are applicable. The impugned summons dated 19.07.2021 is defective contrary to the law and authorities and the fundamental rights over the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The impugned summons have been issued in contravention of the undertaking given before this Court in W.P.