Raman Sharma vs Director, Directorate of Enforcement

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Raman Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Director, Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent

Table of Content
1. application disposed of. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner seeks to set aside prior order. (Para 3 , 4)
3. complexity of white-collar crime requires investigation. (Para 5 , 6)
4. observations on violations and implications of law. (Para 7 , 8)
5. ed must have registered predicate offences. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
6. magistrate cannot direct cbi to register fir. (Para 12 , 13)
7. special court cannot entertain private complaints. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
8. jurisdiction issues due to location of offence. (Para 17)
9. allegations found vague and unsubstantiated. (Para 18 , 19)
10. petition dismissed for lack of merit. (Para 20)

JUDGMENT

CRL.M.A. 37123/2019 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. This application is, accordingly, disposed of.

CRL.REV.P. 1033/2019

3. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby to set aside the order dated 31.08.2019 passed by learned Special Judge (P.C.Act) CBI-10, Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi in case CC 72/2019 titled as "Raman Sharma and Anr. vs. Director, Directorate of Enforcement and Anr."

4. The petitioner herein filed the criminal complaint for the continuing organised offences codified inter-alia under

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTSURESH KUMAR KAITRaman Sharma – AppellantVersusDirector, Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Raman Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Director, Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent