IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Mahesh Mehra – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Through Directorate Of Enforcement – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J.
1. Both these matters are being heard and taken up together and disposed of by this common order/judgment.
2. Both these Criminal Revision petitions have been filed under sections 438 & 442 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
3. Criminal Revision No. 648 of 2025 is directed against the order dated 17.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner- XVIII-cum-Special Judge, PML Act, Ranchi in Misc. Criminal Application No.102 of 2025, in connection with ECIR Case No. 03 of 2023 arising out of ECIR//05/PAT/2012 registered for the offence under Sections 3 read with Section 70 of PMLA, 2002 and punishable under Section 4 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (in short PMLA, 2002), whereby and whereunder, the aforesaid petition filed by the petitioner seeking discharge, has been rejected.
4. Criminal Revision No. 529 of 2025 is directed against the order dated 03.03.2025 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner- XVIII-cum-Special Judge, PML Act, Ranchi in connection with ECIR Case No. 03 of 2023, arising out of ECIR/05/PAT/2012 dated 13.03.2012, whereby and whereunder, the learned Special Court has framed the
State of Tamilnadu, by Inspector of Police in Vigilance and Anti-Corruption v. N. Suresh Rajan
State of Rajasthan v. Ashok Kumar Kashyap
Stree Atyachar Virodhi Parishad v. Dilip Nathumal Chordia
Palwinder Singh v. Balvinder Singh
Asim Shariff v. National Investigation Agency
State of Maharastra vs. Som Nath Thapa
Kanti Bhadra Shah vs. State of West Bengal
State of Andhra Pradesh vs. Golconda Linga Swamy
Ghulam Hassan Beigh v. Mohd. Maqbool Magrey
The court upheld the necessity of trial for charges framed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, emphasizing that prima facie evidence supports the petitioner’s involvement in fraudulent acti....
A discharge petition under PMLA requires a prima facie case to be established; if such a case exists, the trial must proceed.
The court affirmed that an Insolvency Professional, while performing public duties, qualifies as a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and the acceptance of bribes constitutes mone....
The extent of exercise of discretion by Court is limited to prima facie satisfaction of Court and if Court does not find reasonable grounds of suspicion against the Accused, it may discharge him of o....
Point of Law : The extent of exercise of discretion by Court is limited to prima facie satisfaction of Court and if Court does not find reasonable grounds of suspicion against the Accused, it may dis....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.