JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the summon dated 10.11.2020, [D.No.504, dated 11.11.2020] issued by the learned II Additional District Judge for C.B.I. Cases, Madurai, in C.C.No.3 of 2020, which was taken cognizance based on the complaint in ECIR/CEZO/11/2013 registered under Section 45 read with Sections 70 and 8 (5) of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, on the file of the respondent.)

1. The petitioner herein is the third accused in C.C.No.3 of 2020 on the file of the Special Court for PMLA Cases (Court of Principal District Judge), Madurai.

2. Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is filed to quash the summon issued by the learned II Additional District Judge for C.B.I. Cases, Madurai, in C.C.No.3 of 2020, calling for his attendance under Section 61 of Cr.P.C., to answer the charge of offences under Section 45 read with Sections 70 and 8(5) of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 [in short “the PMLA”].

3. This petition is filed to quash the said summon broadly on the following two grounds:-

(a) Firstly, the petitioner contends that there is a statutory infirmity in taking cognizance of the Enforcement Directorate complaint by the learned Special Judge without registering F.I.R. at the commencement of its investigation as provided under Section 154 of Cr.P.C.

(ii) Secondly, the adjudicating proceedings initiated under the PMLA against the petitioner herein for provisional attachment of his property was held to be unsustainable by the adjudicating authority, vide order dated 11.10.2019. While a competent authority has held that the property possessed by the petitioner herein does not fall within the meaning of 'proceeds of crime' as defined under the PMLA, under the same proceedings i.e., in ECIR/CEZO/11/2013, the Enforcement Directorate cannot continue the prosecution against the petitioner under Section 45 read with Sections 70 and 8 (5) of the PMLA.

The background of the case:-

4. Based on the complaint given by the Village Administrative Officer, Keelavalavu Village, Madurai District, a case in Crime No.161 of 2012 was registered against this petitioner and two others for the offences under Section 120-B read with Sections 447, 379, 430, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 116, 202, 409, 304, 511, 109, 114 and Section 34 of I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(ii) of TNPPDL Act, 1992 and Section 6 read with Sections 3(a) and 4(a) of the Explosive Substances Act. After completion of investigation, final report before the learned Judicial Magistrate filed in P.R.C.No.30 of 2018.

5. Since the offences registered by the Keelavalavu Police in Crime No.161 of 2012 discloses commission of scheduled offence by the accused persons, the Enforcement Directorate being satisfied that there is a prima facie case of an offence of money-laundering as defined under Section 3 of the PMLA and punishable under Section 4 of the said Act, registered ECIR/CEZO/11/2013, dated 18.09.2013 and took up the investigation as per the provisions of the PMLA. Consequently, the Enforcement Directorate issued the Provisional Attachment Order [PAO], dated 23.04.2019 and submitted a complaint dated 01.05.2019 before the adjudicating authority along with copies of relied upon documents. The complaint was taken on file by the adjudicating authority as Original Complaint (OC) No.1141 of 2019. The adjudicating authority after taking cognizance of the complaint, had issued a show cause notice dated 21.05.2019 to answer the allegation that the subject properties, which were provisionally attached, were purchased out of illegally acquired funds or out of proceeds of crime and fixed personal hearing on 03.07.2019. Copies of relied upon documents were also furnished to the petitioner along with copy of the complaint dated 01.05.2019. The petitioner herein gave a detailed reply dated 30.07.2019, to the adjudicating authority explaining the legitimacy and the source of funds, from which, the subject properties were purchased. Corroborative m