IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment established that the issuance of a non-bailable warrant should follow proper procedure and judicial guidelines, including the recording of satisfaction by the court.

JUDGMENT :

1. As similar set of facts and law are involved in both the petitions and challenge in both the petitions is the impugned order dated 30.05.2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge & Designated Special Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), whereby, non- bailable warrant came to be issued against the petitioners, both the petitions are required to be heard analogously and decided by this Court with this common judgment.

2. For deciding the present petitions, the facts of Special Criminal Application No.6256 of 2015 are taken into consideration. By way of preferring present petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 and 483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief/s:

(A) To issue a Writ of Mandamus and/or Writ of Certioran and/or any other writ, order or direction, directing to quash and set aside the Order dated 30.05.2015 at Annexure-H passed by the Hon'ble Designated Special Court, Ahmedabad in Criminal Miscellaneous Application qua the Petitioner;

(B) To issue a Writ of Mandamus and/or Writ of Certiorari and/or any other writ, order or direction, directing to convert Non- bailable warrant summons into bailable warrant and further to direct the Hon'ble Designated Special Court, Ahmedabad to take such surety as directed by this Hon'ble Court by Order dated 19/11/2014 in Special Criminal Application No. 4697 of 2014;

(C) At the interim / ad-interim stage, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to restrain the Respondents from taking any coercive steps prejudicial to the Petitioner's interests, during the pendency of the Petition, and to grant stay of his arrest, or to issue a direction to grant interim bail till final disposal of the Instant Petition in the event of the Petitioner's arrest or appearance before the Learned Designated Court;

(D) To pass any other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper.

(E) To provide for the costs of this petition.

3. The brief facts as narrated in the memo of the petition are as under:

3.1. The petitioner has learnt that a team of officers appointed under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as "FEMA") searched the premise identified as farm house in village Sikandarpur, Near Ajwa Chowkdee, Vadodara on 19.03.2015 under Section 37 of FEMA on alleged premises that Shri Girish P. Patel @ Tommy Patel and his associate Shri Kiran J. Mala involved in large scale Hawala Racket in Online International Cricket betting through UK based website "Betfair.Com". During the course of investigation, it was alleged that documents found were related to hawala payment for cricket betting which were in nature of offences under Indian Penal Code and therefore, the documents and digital items were seized under Panchnama dated 19.03.2015. The said materials were shared with the Commissioner of Police, Vadodara for further investigation by the Police

3.2. The Petitioner learnt that the Police registered FIR. No. 85/2015 based on the documents and digital items supplied by the authorities under FEMA against Shri Girish P. Patel @ Tommy Patel, Shri Kiran J. Mala, Shri Dharmendra V. Chauhan @ Dharmin Chauhan & Shri Chirag Parikh for commission of offences in terms of Section 1208 read with 418, 419, 420, 467 and 471 of Indian Penal Code which are scheduled offences in terms off PMLA.

3.3. Pursuant to the aforesaid FIR No.85/2015, the Investigation under provisions of PML Act 2002 were being conducted vide Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) No. ECIR/03/AMZO/2015 by Respondent No.2 to ascertain, identify, locate proceeds of crime generated as a result of alleged Criminal activities by Shri Girish P. Patel @ Tommy Patel, Shri Kiran J. Mala, Shri Dharmendra V. Chauhan, Shri Chirag Parekh and unknown accused as others which constitutes commission of offence in terms of Section 3 of PMLA.

3.4. The Respondent No.2 approached the Designated Court under PMLA for issuance of Non- Bailable Warrant against t