Judicial Members are essential in significant cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, and modification applications to revisit judgments after many years are typically viewed as an abuse of the judicial process.

ORDER :

Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J.

1. A judgment dated 22.09.2015 was rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (Crl.) No. 02 of 2015 filed by Eastern Institute for Integrated Learning in Management University (EIILM University) against the Joint Director and the Enforcement Officer, Directorate of Enforcement, Government of India and the Registrar/Administrative Officer, Adjudicating Authority.

2. EIILM University had prayed for setting aside the show cause notice dated 03.02.2015 issued by the Adjudicating Authority under sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA, 2002) and the subsequent proceedings consequential thereto.

3. The principal ground seeking to quash the show cause notice under section 8 of the PMLA, 2002 by the Adjudicating Authority was that it was issued by a Bench constituted under clause (b) of sub-section (5) of section 6 of the PMLA, 2002 which did not have a Judicial Member.

4. The learned Single Judge after hearing all the parties to the writ petition and examining sub-section (1), (2) and (3) and clause (a) and (b) of sub-section (5) of section 6 of the PMLA, 2002 was of the considered opinion that in a case where serious question of law and fact arise, as in the case before him, it is essential that one of the members of the Bench constituted under clause (b) of sub-section (5) of section 6 of the PMLA, 2002 by the Chairperson of the Adjudicating Authority should be a Judicial Member.

5. In the circumstances, the learned Single Judge issued the following directions to the Directorate of Enforcement (i) to take appropriate steps with the concerned authorities of the Central Government for appointment of Judicial Member of the Adjudicating Authority urgently within a period of three months and not later than that; (ii) on appointment of the Judicial Member the Chairman of the Adjudicating Authority to constitute the Bench consisting of a Judicial Member keeping in view the observations made having regard to the nature of the lis and the anxiety expressed by EIILM University; (iii) soon after it is constituted, the Bench to then issue notice upon the EIILM University who shall appear before the Bench and place before it all grievances expressed in the petition; and (iv) since the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority was stayed by this Court by order dated 02.04.2015, the period of attachment prescribed under sub-section (1) of section 5 to exclude the period spent during the pendency of the case before this Court.

6. An application for modification/clarification of the judgment dated 22.09.2015 passed by this Court has been filed by the Joint Director, Directorate of Enforcement on 08.11.2022 after nearly eight years. The applicant prays for clarification as to whether Member (Judicial) and Member from the field of Law of the Adjudicating Authority under section 6 (3) (a) (ii) of PMLA, 2002 are the same?

7. The application states that pursuant to the judgment dated 22.09.2015 of this Court and in compliance thereto file was moved for reconstitution of Bench of the Adjudicating Authority with the appropriate Ministry of Finance and it was learnt that the Central Government has published a Notification issued vide Gazette of India dated October, 03-09, 2015 for appointment of Shri G.C. Mishra as Member from the field of Law w.e.f. 07.09.2015 having qualified for appointment as member from the field of Law as mandated under section 6 (3) (a) (ii) of PMLA, 2002.

8. It is further stated that the Bench of the Adjudicating Authority was reconstituted on 05.10