Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Vikas Bahl, J.
Dilbag Singh @ Dilbag Sandhu – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
CRM-M No. 2191 of 2024
Decided On : 08-02-2024
Judgment
Mr. Vikas Bahl, J.
Present order shall dispose of two petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘CrPC’) i.e. CRMM-2191-2024 filed by Dilbag Singh @ Dilbag Sandhu and CRM-M-3385- 2024 filed by Kulwinder Singh, since common questions of law and facts arise in both the cases and also since both the petitions arise from the same ECIR.
2. This judgment has been divided into the following sections: -
| 1. | Prayers made in both the petitions | Paras 3 & 4 |
| 2. | Brief facts of the case | Paras 5 to 7 |
| 3. | Arguments on behalf of the petitioners | Paras 8 to 13 |
| 4. | Arguments on behalf of the respondents | Paras 14 to 19 |
| 5. | Arguments on behalf of the petitioners in rebuttal | Paras 20 to 29 |
| 6. | Findings of this Court | Paras 30 to 75 |
|
| a) Non-application of mind and non recording of compliance of the conditions/stipulations contained in Section 19 by the Special Court while passing the impugned orders | Paras 30 to 41 |
|
| b) Illegal detention/wrongful restraint of the petitioners from 04.01.2024 to 08.01.2024 amounting to arrest on 04.01.2024 itself and consequential violations of Section 19 of PMLA read with Section 167 CrPC on account of non- production of petitioners within 24 hours | Paras 42 to 54 |
|
| c) Violation of the provisions of Section 19(2) of the 2002 Act | Paras 55 to 60 |
|
| d) Non-compliance of Section 19(1) of the 2002 Act | Paras 61 to 66 |
| 7. | Additional Issues | Paras 67 to 75 |
| 8. | Conclusion/Relief | Paras 76 to 79 |
3. The following prayers have been made in the case of petitioner Dilbag Singh @ Dilbag Sandhu: -
“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the present petition may kindly be allowed and the (a) Impugned Arrest Order dated 08.01.2024 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No.2; (b) Impugned Arrest Memo dated 08.01.2024 (Annexure P-4) prepared by respondent No.2; (c) Impugned Order dated 09.01.2024 (Annexure P-7) passed by Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (under PMLA, 2002), Gurugram passed in application vide CRM No.35 of 2024 (Annexure P-6) in ECIR No.GNZO/19/2023 dated 23.09.2023 under Section 65 of the PMLA Act, 2002 may kindly be set-aside since the petitioner was illegally arrested and remanded to ED Custody in gross abuse and violation of the provisions of Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 {PMLA, 2002} in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 633; V. Senthil Balaji vs. The State represented by Deputy Director and others, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 611; and Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India & Ors. Criminal Appeal Nos.3051-3052 of 2023 D/d 03.10.2023.
It is further prayed that appropriate interim orders/directions may kindly be issued to the respondents to release the petitioner forthwith from the custody during the pendency of the present petition.
It is further prayed that this Hon’ble Court may pass any other order or direction which it may deem fit and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”
4. Prayers in the case of petitioner Kulwinder Singh are as follows: -
“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the present petition may kindly be allowed and the (a) Impugned Arrest Order dated 08.01.2024 (Annexure P2) passed by respondent No.2; (b) Impugned Arrest Memo dated 08.01.2024 (Annexure P-3) prepared by respondent No.2; (c) Impugned Order dated 09.01.2024 (Annexure P-7) and 16.01.2024 (Annexure P-9) passed by Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (under PMLA, 2002), Gurugram passed in application vide CRM No.35 of 2024 (Annexure P-6) in ECIR No.GNZO/19/2023 dated 23.09.2023 under Section 65 of the PMLA Act, 2002 may kindly be set-aside since the petitioner was illegally arrested and remanded to ED Custody in gross abuse and violation of the provisions of Pr
Mandatory compliance with Section 19 of the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act is essential; failure to comply renders arrest and subsequent proceedings illegal.
The court established that non-compliance with the mandatory requirements of Section 19 of the PMLA regarding informing the accused of the grounds for arrest and the court's duty to record reasons fo....
The court upheld the legality of the arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, confirming compliance with statutory requirements, including timely communication of grounds for arrest.
(1) Arrest of suspect by ED – Mere passing of an order of remand would not be sufficient in itself to validate appellants’ arrests, if such arrests are not in conformity with requirements of Section ....
Supply of documents to arrestee – Person asserted, if he is informed or made aware orally about grounds of arrest at the time of his arrest and is furnished a written communication about grounds of a....
The court determined that the unlawful restraint of the petitioners on 27.10.2023 constituted an illegal arrest, rendering the subsequent remand orders void.
The court upheld that arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was lawful as procedural requirements of Section 19 were sufficiently met, emphasizing limits of judicial review on subjectiv....
Court held that oral communication of arrest grounds is sufficient compliance under Section 19 of the PMLA prior to updates in judicial interpretation, validating the legality of the petitioner’s arr....
Compliance with Section 19 of PMLA and satisfaction of twin conditions under Section 45 of PMLA are crucial for determining the validity of arrest and granting bail.
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
