Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. SURESH KUMAR, K. KUMARESH BABU, JJ.
V. Senthil Balaji – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Director Directorate of Enforcement Ministry of Finance, Chennai – Respondent
Criminal Original Petition No. 20602 of 2023
Decided On : 04-09-2023
PMLA Act - Jurisdiction of Special Courts - Section 43(1) - S.O.372(E) dated 05.02.2016 - Principal District Judge, Chennai - Special Court No.I for Trial of Cases exclusively against MLAs and MPs - C.C.No.9 of 2023 - Summary of Acts and Sections: PMLA Act, 2002, Section 43(1), Section 4 - The court discussed the jurisdiction of Special Courts designated under Section 43(1) of the PMLA Act and the notification issued by the Central Government dated 05.02.2016. It emphasized that offences punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA Act must be tried only by Special Courts designated under Section 43(1) and highlighted the powers of the Central Government to designate such Courts. The court concluded that the bail application in C.C.No.9 of 2023 should be heard and disposed of only by the Principal Judge, Chennai, and directed the withdrawal of the case from Special Court No.I for Trial of Cases exclusively against MLAs and MPs.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a sitting MLA, filed a petition to set aside the return Docket Order and direct the Special Court to entertain and number the bail application in C.C.No.9 of 2023. The Special Court and the Principal Judge, Chennai, returned the bail application, leading the petitioner to file the present original petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the bail application in C.C.No.9 of 2023 should be heard and disposed of only by the Principal Judge, Chennai, and directed the withdrawal of the case from Special Court No.I for Trial of Cases exclusively against MLAs and MPs.
Issues: Jurisdiction of Special Courts under Section 43(1) of the PMLA Act, designation of Special Courts by the Central Government, and the appropriate Court to hear the bail application in C.C.No.9 of 2023.
Ratio Decidendi: Offences punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA Act must be tried only by Special Courts designated under Section 43(1) of the PMLA Act. The Central Government has the power to designate such Courts, and the territorial jurisdiction of the case determines the appropriate Court for trial.
Final Decision: The court set aside the return Docket Order and directed the Principal Judge, Chennai, to withdraw the case from Special Court No.I for Trial of Cases exclusively against MLAs and MPs and entertain the bail application in C.C.No.9 of 2023.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the return Docket Order dated 29.08.2023 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge of Chennai Special Court constituted under Section 43(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, and consequently direct the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge or the Special Court-I for the Trial of Cases relating to MP and MLA, Chennai to entertain and number the bail application in Crl.M.P.SR.No.21974 of 2023 in C.C.No.9 of 2023 on the file of The Special Court-I for the Trial of Cases relating to MP and MLA, Singaravelar Maaligai, Chennai and dispose of the same on merits within a time frame as fixed by this Hon''ble Court.)
R. Suresh Kumar, J.
1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking a prayer to set aside the return Docket Order dated 29.08.2023 passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge of Chennai Special Court constituted under Section 43(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, and consequently direct the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge or the Special Court-I for the Trial of Cases relating to MP and MLA, Chennai to entertain and number the bail application in Crl.M.P.SR.No.21974 of 2023 in C.C.No.9 of 2023 on the file of The Special Court-I for the Trial of Cases relating to MP and MLA, Singaravelar Maaligai, Chennai.
2. The brief facts which are required to be noticed for the disposal of this petition are as follows. That the petitioner is a sitting MLA, against whom ECIR No.MDSZO/21/2021 taking the allegation in C.C.No.19/2021, C.C.No.24/2021, C.C.No.25/2021 on the file of Additional Special Court for Trial of Cases against MP/MLA as predicate offence has been registered by the prosecution and a complaint was lodged under Section 44(1)(b) and 45(1) read with Section 3 and 4 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ''PMLA Act'') on 12.08.2023.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that, on 14.06.2023 he was arrested relating to the said case and during his judicial custody, as he had to undergo a major surgery, that surgery also he had undergone on 21.06.2023. Thereafter, on recovery from his illness, as per the request of the respondent Enforcement Directorate, police custody was given between 07.08.2023 and 12.08.2023 ie., for six days, and he had been under the custody of the respondent. Thereafter, final report insofar as this petitioner is concerned had been filed by the respondent on 12.08.2023.
4. Therefore, it is the further case of the petitioner that, since the investigation is over, no more interrogation is required, and since final report is filed, therefore his judicial custody which has already crossed 78 days is no more required.
5. That apart, it is the further case of the petitioner that, even after he had undergone the major surgery as stated supra, as per the recent report of the doctors'' team, he has to still take medication as he has developed some more ancillary complaints. Therefore, on medical grounds also, he is entitled for bail.
6. That is the reason why the petitioner had moved a bail application on 28.08.2023 before the Special Court-I at Chennai which has already been designated as a Special Court to try the cases against MLAs and MPs.
7. The aforesaid case, though had been initially pending before the Principal Judge, Chennai, who, by virtue of the Special Court since has been constituted to try the cases against MLAs and MPs, has decided to make over the case to the said Special Court and accordingly an order has been passed on 14.08.2023 according to Mr.N.R.Elango, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, by which the learned Principal Judge, Chennai has transferred the case papers or made over the case papers to the Special Court-I for trying the cases exclusively against MLAs and MPs. Therefore, as of
AI
Offences punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA Act must be tried only by Special Courts designated under Section 43(1) of the PMLA Act, and the Central Government has the power to designate such Cou....
Under the governing legislation, a tribunal handling a predicate offence is statutorily mandated to transfer the matter to the designated special tribunal upon application by the investigating author....
The court affirmed that under Section 44(1)(c) of the PMLA, the Special Court is designated to try both scheduled offences and money laundering offences, emphasizing legislative intent for discretion....
Point of Law : Application was not maintainable before learned Magistrate, since Court did not have the power to direct recording of statements for it to become a record under the PMLA, the order wh....
The court emphasized the importance of cooperation with the investigation, the gravity of the offense, and the need to balance the fundamental right of personal liberty with the reasonable restrictio....
(1) Section 88 of Cr.P.C. is in no manner inconsistent with provisions of PMLA – Section 88 will apply after filing of a complaint under Section 44(1)(b) of PMLA – Order accepting bonds under Section....
Practice and Procedure - Special court - Jurisdiction of - There is no ambiguity in language of Section 44(1)(c) of PMLA. The concerned court, which is trying the scheduled offence, is required to tr....
The court's decision highlighted the lack of objective satisfaction about the petitioner's guilt, the divergent views expressed by the High Courts and the Supreme Court, and the personal liberty of t....
Bail under PMLA not cancellable without supervening circumstances like liberty misuse, bail condition violation, or evidence tampering; special court validly applied Section 45 twin conditions absent....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
