Prima facie evidence under the PMLA was deemed sufficient to proceed with prosecution despite discharge petitions, emphasizing limited scrutiny during such petitions.

ORDER :

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

Factual Background

An entity named ‘Olympus Granites (P) Limited’ (Olympus Granites’) applied for grant of lease to quarry multi-coloured granite over an extent of 1.21.5 hectares in SF No.259 / 4B2 of Keelavalavu Village, Melur, Madurai District, for a period of 30 years under Rule 19A of the Tamil Nadu Minor Minerals Concessions Rules, 1959. By G.O.(3D) No. 46, Industries (MMB-1) Department dated 14.07.2008, the Government of Tamil Nadu granted a quarry lease to Olympus Granites for a period of 20 years subject to specific conditions. The said order also directed the execution of an agreement in the prescribed form. Such agreement was executed on 13.08.2008. Pursuant thereto, Olympus Granites undertook quarrying activities in financial years 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 and paid seigniorage fees of Rs.45,37,692/-. Granite blocks extracted from the quarry were transported after obtaining transport permits.

2. Subsequently, the quarry lease was cancelled on 06.09.2012 for the alleged violation of the condition pertaining to maintenance of a safety distance of 10 metres between the leased land and the Government poromboke land. A complaint in relation to illicit quarrying of granites was filed on 06.08.2012 by the Village Administrative Officer, Keelavalavu District, before the Keelavalavu Police Station. The complaint was inter alia under Sections 447 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code (the IPC ) and Section 3 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 (the TNPPDL Act) read with Sections 4 (1), 4(2), 4(3) and 21(b) and 5 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 . Based on the complaint, Crime No.161 of 2012 dated 06.08.2012 was registered against Olympus Granites and two others. The final report was filed on 13.11.2017 before the Judicial Magistrate, Melur, in respect of offences under Section 120B read with , 379, 409, 411, 420, 434, 468, 471, 304(ii), 109, 114, 511 r/w. Sections 109 , 116, 119 & 202 thereof; Sections 6 read with Sections 3 (a) & 4(a) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Section 4 of the TNPPDL Act. PRC No. 30 of 2018 was assigned and cognisance was taken on 13.06.2018.

3. On the ground that some of the alleged offences in relation to the predicate offence of illicit quarrying are scheduled offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (the PMLA), pursuant to letter dated 11.07.2013 from the Superintendent of Police, Madurai, the Directorate of Enforcement registered ECIR bearing No.ECIR/CEZ0/11-2013, dated 18.09.2013, for conducting investigation under the said statute. The prosecution in respect of the predicate offence is pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Melur. Meanwhile, proceedings in relation to prosecution under the PMLA were instituted in C.C. No.3/2020 before the 2^nd Additional District Court (CBI cases), Madurai. The revision petitioner herein was arrayed as the second accused therein. He filed Crl.M.P.No.4274 of 2023 seeking discharge. The discharge petition was dismissed under the impugned order dated 30.05.2024.

4. This revision petition is directed against order dated 30.05.2024 and was listed before the Division Bench of this Court. Justice G.R.Swaminathan held that the impugned order did not contain a discussion of the materials on record and did not demonstrate as to how a prima facie case is made out against the revision petitioner. On that ground, it was held that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the matter remitted to the file of the tria