CRL.M.C. 7277/2023 & 7278/2023

Page 1 of 51

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Judgment reserved on: 09.10.2023

Judgment pronounced on: 13.10.2023

+

CRL.M.C. 7277/2023

AMIT CHAKRABORTY ..... Petitioner

versus

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent

CRL.M.C. 7278/2023,

CRL.M.A. 27162/2023, CRL.M.A. 27164/2023

PRABIR PURKAYASTHA

..... Petitioner

versus

STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

..... Respondent

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioners :

Mr. Rohit Sharma, Mr. Rounak Nayak,

Mr. Nikhil Purohit and Mr. Jatin

Lalwani, Advocates (in CRL.M.C.

7277/2023)

Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Dayan Krishnan

and Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Sr.

Advocates with Mr. Arshdeep Singh

Khurana, Mr. Harsh Srivastava, Mr.

Harshit Mahalwal, Mr. Sidak Singh

Anand, Mr. Manan Khanna, Mr. Nikhil

Pawar,

Ms.

Rupali

Samuel,

Ms.

Sowjhanya Shankar, Mr. Shreedhar

Kale, Mr. Chaitanya and Mr. Vibhu

Digitally Signed

By:VINOD KUMAR

Signing Date:13.10.2023

13:32:09

Signature Not Verified

CRL.M.C. 7277/2023 & 7278/2023

Page 2 of 51

Walia,

Advocates

(in

CRL.M.C.

7278/2023)

For the Respondent :

Mr. Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General

with Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC, Mr.

Akhand Pratap Singh, Mr. Kshitiz

Garg, Mr. Ashvini Kumar, Mr. Rahul

Kochar, Ms. Chavi Lazarus, Mr. Zoheb

Hossain, Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Mr.

Baibhav and Ms. Manisha Dubey,

Advocates for STATE

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA

J U D G M E N T

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.

[ The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode ]

1.

Upon the requests made by the learned counsel for the parties,

CRL.M.C. 7278/2023 is taken up for adjudication first.

CRL.M.C. 7278/2023

2.

The petitioner seeks following reliefs:-

Digitally Signed

By:VINOD KUMAR

Signing Date:13.10.2023

13:32:09

Signature Not Verified

CRL.M.C. 7277/2023 & 7278/2023

Page 3 of 51

3.

Facts as culled out from the petition filed by the petitioner are as

follows:-

Digitally Signed

By:VINOD KUMAR

Signing Date:13.10.2023

13:32:09

Signature Not Verified

CRL.M.C. 7277/2023 & 7278/2023

Page 4 of 51

Digitally Signed

By:VINOD KUMAR

Signing Date:13.10.2023

13:32:09

Signature Not Verified

CRL.M.C. 7277/2023 & 7278/2023

Page 5 of 51

Digitally Signed

By:VINOD KUMAR

Signing Date:13.10.2023

13:32:09

Signature Not Verified

CRL.M.C. 7277/2023 & 7278/2023

Page 6 of 51

4.

Before adverting to the arguments and facts as addressed in the

present case, it is deemed relevant to consider the law which would

govern the considerations in the present case.

LEGAL ANALYSIS

5.

This Court considers that the following legal issues arise in the

present case:-

(a)

6.

The substratum of the arguments addressed on behalf of the

petitioner revolves around the ratio recently laid down by the Supreme

Court in PankajBansal Vs. Union of India & Ors, reported in2023

SCC OnLine SC 1244,which will be adverted to in the following

Digitally Signed

By:VINOD KUMAR

Signing Date:13.10.2023

13:32:09

Signature Not Verified

CRL.M.C. 7277/2023 & 7278/2023

Page 7 of 51

paragraphs.According to the petitioner, though the aforesaid case was in

the context of the provisions of sections 19(1), 19(2) and 45 of The

Prevention Of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as

“PMLA”) read with Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India, however,

the language of section 19 of PMLA being pari materia with section

43B of The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter

referred to as “UAPA”), the ratio would be squarely applicable to the

facts of the present case. The emphasis was on the following

paragraphs:-

Digitally Signed

By:VINOD KUMAR

Signing Date:13.10.2023

13:32:09

Signature Not Verif