Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA
Satinder Singh Bhasin – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Chandra Dhari Singh, J.
1. Since both the afore-captioned Criminal Misc. Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the ECIR/LKZO/14/2021, they have been heard together and are being disposed by means of this common order. For adjudication of both the writ petitions the facts of Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.9232 of 2025 has been taken.
2. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, seeking the following reliefs:
“(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing and setting aside order dated 11.04.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, CBI, Ghaziabad whereby open ended Non-Bailable Warrants have been issued against the petitioner in relation to ECIR/LKZO/14/2021;
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamum or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction restraining the respondent, its officers, or any person acting under its authority, from initiating or continuing any coercive actions against the petitioner under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, in relation to ECIR/LKZO/14/2021 or related matters;
(iii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other
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 court established that the offense of money laundering under PMLA cannot exist independently of a scheduled offense.
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....
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.
FIR and ECIR become two different documents and both tend to take shape on its own, independent of each other.
A quashed FIR does not automatically invalidate an ECIR; the ECIR is independent and requires substantive grounds for quashing based on the merits of the predicate offence under PMLA.
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'.
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.
Prosecution under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is not sustainable without a registered scheduled offence, as established by the Supreme Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary.
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
