HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7224/2024

1. Sukhdev S/o Gangaram, Aged About 29 Years, Isharwal Golia, P.s. Sanchore, Distt. Jhalore, Raj.

2. Subhash Kumar S/o Bhagwana Ram, Aged About 22 Years, Dhamana Ka Goliya, Ps Sanchore, Distt. Jhalore, Raj.

----Petitioners Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp, Rhc, Jodhpur.

----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ojas Shakdwipeeya Mr. Dinesh Vishnoi (through VC)

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

Order

15/01/2026 The present criminal misc. petition has been preferred being aggrieved against the order dated 31.07.2024 passed by the Sessions Judge No.1, Udaipur. The learned Sessions Judge has passed the order upon the application being filed under Section 44(1)(c) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2022 (herein referred to as the PMLA Act), by which, the proceedings pending before it were committed to the Special Court under the PMLA Act at Jaipur.

The petitioner whose case is still under investigation and against whom the trial was not pending has approach this Court stating that the Additional Session Judge had no authority to transfer/commit the case to the Special Court at Jaipur, and secondly that under the garb of this order, the entire investigation has also been transferred.

This court has considered the arguments raised by the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

In the present case after investigation the charge sheet was filed under Sections 419, 420 and 120-B IPC and Section 3, 6, 9/10 Rajasthan Public Examination Act, 2022. Since, the offences were included in the scheduled offences under PMLA Act therefore, the case was also investigated by Enforcement Directorate, and, thereafter a complaint was filed before the Special Court under the PMLA Act at Jaipur, and the cognizance was taken by the Special court on 24.01.2024.

Section 43 of the PMLA Act provides for constitution of Special Court for trial of the offences punishable under the Act and Section 44 provides for the offences triable by the Special Court notwithstanding anything contained in the Cr.P.C. Section 44(1)(c) provides that if the Court which had taken cognizance of the schedule offences is other than the Special Court which has taken the cognizance of the complaint of offences of money-laundering it shall commit the case relating to schedule offences to the Special Court, upon an application filed by the Authority.

In the present case the offences were investigated by the Police Authorities and after investigation the charge-sheet was filed before the Court at Udaipur which was committed to the ADJ No.1, Udaipur. Since the offences were also investigated under the PMLA Act, after investigation the complaint was filed before the Special Court which is pending for consideration and in which the cognizance has been taken. Therefore, in view of the provision of Section 44(1)(c) the other Court which has taken cognizance of the schedule offences is required to commit the case relating to the schedule offence to the Special court. It is not disputed that the case pending before the ADJ, Udaipur is regarding the schedule offences under the PMLA Act, for which the complaint has been filed before the Special Court under the PMLA Act at Jaipur. Therefore, the same was required to be committed to the Special Court. An appropriate application was preferred under Section 14(1)(c) of the PMLA Act and in view of the provisions of the Act, the Court before whom the matter was pending was required to commit the case directly. The provisions of the Section 44(1)(c) are absolutely clear. The learned ADJ, Udaipur has considered the matter in detail upon the application filed under Section 44(1)(c), and after due consideration of the provisions of the Act, as well as the facts of the case, has rightly committed the case pending before it, to the Special Court at Jaipur. There is no illegality in the order, and the sam