IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Arun Palli, Vikram Aggarwal, JJ.
Sikandar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Directorate of Enforcement – Respondent
CRM-M No. 51250 of 2023
Decided On : 26-02-2024
Judgment
Mr. Vikram Aggarwal, J.
CRM-47079-2023 , CRM-47080-2023 & CRM-47985-2023 in CRM-M-51250-2023 and
CRM-35285-2023 CRM-35305-2023 CRM-35308-2023 CRM-48105-2023 in CRM-M-37710-2023
Since the main petitions are being decided, the present applications have been rendered infructuous and are disposed of as such.
CRM-M-51250-2023 & CRM-M-37710-2023
1. The instant petitions shall be decided by way of a common judgment as the relief sought in both the petitions is identical. The petitioners have knocked the doors of this Court praying for the following substantive relief:-
1. Quash the ECIR/GNZO/20/2021 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom as the same does not sustain the test of law, equity or justice in the sake of the Orders dated 05.07.2023 (Annexure P-13) passed by this Hon’ble Court in CRM-M No.3823 of 2021 thereby setting at naught the directions issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurugram on 07.01.2021 in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. for the registration of FIR (scheduled/predicate offence in the present case) and thereby rendering the said FIR No.11 dated 14.01.2021 (Annexure P-10) under Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, 1860 registered at Police Station Sushant Lok (i.e. scheduled/predicate offence) to be rendered non-est; terminated and unworthy of being acted upon for any purpose whatsoever;
2. Quash the order dated 29.09.2023 (Annexure P-23) passed by Special Judge, Gurugram in CRM-627-2023, vide which arbitrarily and illegally non bailable warrants of arrest has been issued against the petitioner’
3. Quash the summons dated 28.07.2023 & 08.08.2023 (Annexures P-17 & P-18) and all subsequent summons issued to the petitioner as the same are wholly untenable in law;
4. Quash and set aside the action of the respondents in carrying out absolutely illegal, unwarranted and unjustified searches and seizures at the residential house etc. of the petitioners at Gurugram;
5. Stay all further proceedings arising out of ECIR/GNZO/20/2021, during the pendency of this Hon’ble Court.
6. Stay the operation and execution of the impugned warrants of arrest issued against the petitioners vide order dated 29.09.2023 (Annexure P-23) passed by Special Judge, Gurugram, during the pendency of this Hon’ble Court;
7. Pass such other order(s) or direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner.
It would be essential to mention that in CRM-M-37710 of 2023, quashing of the order dated 29.09.2023 has not been sought, for, at the time of filing of the said petition, the order (ibid) had not been passed.
FACTUAL MATRIX
2. The facts, germane to the issue in hand, are being extracted from
3(i) One Neeraj Chaudhary submitted two complaints bearing Nos.486 of 2020 & 487 of 2020 (Annexures P-5 & P-6) in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurugram under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) read with Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. seeking directions for registration and investigation of the complaints (ibid) at Police Station Sushant Lok, Gurugram, under Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. The petitioners Sikandar Singh and Vikas Chhoker were arraigned as accused in the said complaints apart from 13 other persons by name and other accused, if found involved after investigation. Broadly, the allegations were that the petitioners and other persons named in the complaint alongwith other unnamed persons were in construction business and had duped the investors after having obtained licence to develop a housing project in Sector 68, Gurugram which also had been obtained on submission of forged and fabricated documents. It was alleged that about 3000 investors had been left high and dry and a wrongful loss of around one thousand crores had been caused. Allegations were also of furnishing of fake bank guarantees, collaboration agreement, special power of attorney etc.
3(ii) Vide order dated 07.01.2021 (Annexure
Lalita Kumari Versus Government of U.P. and others
State of West Bengal and others Versus Swapan Kumar Guha and others
State of Punjab Vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar
Narayan @ Narayan Sai @ Mota Bhagwan Vs. State of Gujarat
Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin Vs. State of Maharashtra and another
Gautam Kundu vs. Directorate of Enforcement
P. Chidambaram Vs. Directorate of Enforcement
Union of India Vs. Padam Narain Aggarwal and Others
The King Emperor Vs. Khawaja Nazir Ahmad
Dukhishyam Benupani, Asst. Director, Enforcement Directorate (FERA) Vs. Arun Kumar Bajoria
Commissioner of Customs, Calcutta and Others Vs. M/s M.M. Exports and Another
Special Director Vs. Mohd. Gulam Ghouse
Raj Kumar Shivhare Vs. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement and Another, (2010) 4 SCC 772
AI
The court upheld the validity of the ECIR independent of the FIRs, affirming that non-bailable warrants were justified due to the petitioners' non-cooperation in the investigation.
The presence of a scheduled offence legitimizes the existence of an ECIR and allows the department to continue the investigation. However, the settlement or quashing of scheduled offences in FIRs pro....
Anticipatory bail under the PMLA requires clear evidence that the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences, which was not demonstrated in this case.
A predicate offence must exist for PMLA investigations to proceed; if proceedings are stayed, then related investigations, including ECIR and NBWs, must also desist.
The regulatory authority possesses the power to initiate independent inquiries into proceeds of crime. An internal investigative document is not a statutory requirement, and the registration of a pre....
The court established that the offense of money laundering under PMLA cannot exist independently of a scheduled offense.
The Prevention of Money Laundering Act proceedings cannot survive if the predicate offences linked to them are closed by the court, indicating the non-existence of 'proceeds of crime'.
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.