The jurisdiction of the Special Court under the PMLA and the constitutionality of Section 44(1)(c) of the PMLA were the central legal points established in the judgment.

ORDER

1. Vide the present petition; the petitioner is seeking following reliefs:

"(i) Issue an appropriate writ or direction thereby declaring Section 44(1)(c) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 as ultra-vires and unconstitutional and strike it down consequently;

(ii) Call for the record of the case bearing No. CBI 14/2020 titled-"CBI vs Deepak Talwar & Ors.", now pending before the court of Ms. Anuradha Shukla Bharadwaj, Ld. ASJ, Rouse Avenue Courts as C. C. 17/2021;

(iii) Quash and set aside the impugned order dated 18.02.2021 passed by the court of Ms. Ambika Singh, Ld. CMM, Rouse Avenue Courts, Delhi, in case bearing No. C.B.I. 14/2020 titled-"CBI vs Deepak Talwar & Ors."

(iv) Direct the court of Ms. Anuradha Shukla Bharadwaj. Ld. ASJ, Rouse Avenue Courts, Delhi to transfer/commit the matter bearing CC No. 17/2021 arising out of RC-36-DAI-2017, back to the court of Ms. Ambika Singh, Ld. CMM, Rouse Avenue Courts, Delhi for trial."

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has produced two judgments of the Supreme Court, whereby the prayers of the present petition have been answered.

3. In case of Rana Ayyub vs. Directorate of Enforcement through its Assistant Director in Writ Petition (CRL.) No. 12/2023 observed and held that:

"35. The only contingency that could not have been provided in the above provisions of the Cr.P.C, is perhaps where the offence of money-laundering is committed. This is why Section 44(1) begins with a non-obstante clause. The whole picture is thus complete with a combination reading of Section 44 of the PMLA and provisions of Section 177 to 184 of the Cr.P.C."

"36. Once this combined scheme is understood, it will be clear that in view of the specific mandate of clauses (a) and (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 44, it is the Special Court constituted under the PMLA that would have jurisdiction to try even the scheduled offence. Even if the scheduled offence is taken cognizance of by any other Court, that Court shall commit the same, on an application by the concerned authority, to the Special Court which has taken cognizance of the offence of money-laundering. This answers the first question posed before us."

4. Regarding the prayer (ii) the learned counsel has produced a judgement titled as Vijay Madanial Choudhary and Others vs. Union of India and Others, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 929, the Supreme Court has observed and held as under:

"366. In the context of this provision, it was emphatically argued before us by the petitioners that it would take away one right of appeal, otherwise available under the 1973 Code. Resultantly Section 44(1) (c) of the 2002 Act in particular, is unconstitutional. To buttress this submission, reliance has been placed on the dictum in A.R. Antulay 570. However, this ground need not detain us in view of the just stand taken by the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for Union of India relying on the decision of this Court in State (Through Central Bureau of Investigation) vs. Kalyan Singh (Former Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh) & Ors., 571, which 570 Supra at Footnote No.134 571 (2017) 7 SCC 444 has considered similar challenge. The latter decision has distinguished the exposition in A.R. Antulay 572. In that, the core issue considered in A.R. Antulay 573 was whether the High Court was competent to transfer the criminal trial pending before the Special Court dealing with the offence of PC Act, to itself by invoking powers under Section 407 of the 1973 Code. The Court answered the same in the negative and held that such power does not exist in the High Court and it would inevitably violate Article 21 of the Constitution. However, we are dealing with the dispensation provided by the law made by the Parliament in the form of 2002 Act. This being a special legislation and keeping in view the purport of Sections 65 and 71 of the 2002 Act, it is not possible to countenance the ground of challenge under consideration. We may usefully refer to parag