Order

05/03/2025 In S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 2152/2024

1. By way of filing this instant Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Rule 315(1)(h) of the Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952, the petitioner seeks quashing of ECIR/JPZO/27/2023 dated 21.08.2023 and the proceedings emanating therefrom, asserting that the same are in violation of the petitioner's fundamental and legal rights.

2. The Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) in question was registered based on the lodging of three First Information Reports (FIRs). However, upon a thorough investigation in all three cases, no incriminating evidence was found against the petitioner, and a negative final report was submitted, which has been duly accepted by the competent court.

3. This Court specifically inquired from learned counsel for the respondents whether any attempt had been made on their behalf to seek further investigation in these three FIRs. The response was unequivocally in the negative.

4. It is a settled proposition of law that the jurisdiction to initiate an ECIR is contingent upon the existence of a predicate offence. In the present case, the predicate offences, which formed the very foundation for the registration of the ECIR, have culminated in final reports that stand accepted by the competent court. Moreover, no application has been filed to revive or reopen the said cases.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance on FIR No. 527/2023, registered in Bundi under Section 420 IPC and other allied provisions, and FIR No. 168/2023, registered in Tonk under Section 302 IPC and other allied provisions. However, in FIR No. 527/2023, the investigation was conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), and the petitioner has not been named as an accused in the charge sheet. Likewise, in FIR No. 168/2023, the petitioner has not been arrayed as an accused till date.

6. In light of the foregoing, this petition is admitted.

7. Issuance of notice is dispensed with.

8. Learned counsel for the respondents may file a reply explaining why the petition should not be allowed and why the ECIR in question should not be quashed.

In S.B. Criminal Misc. Stay Petition No. 7388/2024

9. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the material placed on record, it is evident that the Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR/JPZO/27/2023) was registered on the basis of three FIRs, in which final reports, having found no incriminating material against the petitioner, have already been accepted by the competent court. Furthermore, in FIR No. 527/2023 (Bundi) and FIR No. 168/2023 (Tonk), the petitioner has not been named as an accused in the charge sheet and has not been arrayed as an accused till date, respectively.

In light of the settled legal position that proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) cannot be sustained in the absence of a subsisting predicate offence, this Court is of the prima facie view that the petitioner has made out a strong arguable case.

Accordingly, till disposal of the writ petition, it is directed that: 1. No coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner in connection with ECIR/JPZO/27/2023, including but not limited to arrest or filing of charge sheet.

2. However, it is made clear that in the event the respondent authorities come across any incriminating material relating to the predicate offences, they shall not be precluded from approaching this Court for seeking appropriate modifications or alterations in this order.

10. Accordingly , the stay application is allowed.

(FARJAND ALI),J

186-Mamta/-