ORDER :

S.VAIDYANATHAN, JAYACHANDRAN, JJ.

T.Subramanian the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.14567 of 2021 is the former Executive Engineer in Manimuthar Basin Division, PWD, WRD, Devakottai. His wife S.Rajeswari is the petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.14568 of 2021. These two writ petitions are filed by the husband and wife challenging the summons dated 30.07.2021, issued under Section 50 (2) and (3) of the Prevention of Money- Laundering Act, 2002 [in short ''PMLA''], by the Enforcement Directorate to appear before the Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate, Madurai, on 23rd August, 2021 along with the documents mentioned in the schedule annexed to the summons.

2. The facts leading to the writ petitions is that, on reliable source information that T.Subramanaian had acquired and in possession of movable and immovable properties and pecuniary resources in his name and his wife's name [Rajeswari] disproportionate to his known source of income, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Madurai, registered a case under Sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(b) of Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 109 of IPC against the writ petitioners herein in Crime No.5 of 2021 on 16.04.2021. The said case is under investigation.

3. Meanwhile, the Enforcement Directorate on registration of complaint in the predicate offence disclosing prima facie case for money-laundering, had registered case in F.No.ECIR/MDSZO/16/2021 against the writ petitioners and had issued summons to them to appear and produce documents for the purpose of investigation.

4. The said summon dated 30.07.2021 is challenged in these writ petitions on the ground that,

(a) The authorities of Enforcement Directorate acquire jurisdiction to commence investigation only after the conclusion / confirmation that the properties are the proceeds of crime as a result of criminal activity relating to the offences mentioned in the schedule to the PMLA. Before such declaration, authorities have no jurisdiction to summon under the PMLA.

(b) The issuance of summon under Section 50 of the PMLA is for the attachment of the property involved in money-laundering. As per proviso of Section 5 of the PMLA, no provisional order of attachment shall be made unless a report has been forwarded to the Magistrate under Section 173 Cr.P.C. in relation to any schedule offence. In the instant case, F.I.R. alone is filed and no progress in the investigation. While so, the Enforcement Directorate has hurriedly commenced investigation under the PMLA.

5. According to learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners, 'proceeds of crime' as defined under the Act could be determined only after the conclusion of trial in the predicate offence. Filing of final report in the predicate offence is precondition to proceed under the PMLA for provisional attachment under Section 5 of the PMLA. Since the summon is issued without jurisdiction and not in accordance to the format prescribed under the Rules framed thereunder, the same is liable to be quashed for want of jurisdiction.

6. In support of the Writ Petitions, the following judgements are relied by the petitioners' counsel:

(i) Mahanivesh Oils & Foods Private Ltd Vs. Directorate of Enforcement [2016] (1) High Court Cases (Del) 265.

(ii) Ajay Kumar Gupta and others Vs. Adjudicating Authority and others [2017 SCC online Mad 37651].

7. The respondent oppose the writ petitions for the reasons that, the petitions are ill-conceived and devoid of merits. The Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption had registered an F.I.R. against the writ petitioners under Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act as amended by Central Act 16 of 2018 for possession of disproportionate assets. The said offence is a schedule offence under the PMLA and on prima facie disclosure of money-laundering offence, the Enforcement Directorate has registered F.I.R. and had issued summons under Section 50 of the PMLA for investigation in order to ascertain whether the accused pers