Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Section 317 Cr.P.C. - Grants the Special Court the power to exempt an accused from personal appearance during inquiry or trial, exercising this power liberally based on facts and circumstances. It is an additional power alongside Section 205, not exclusive of it. The Court can exercise discretion to dispense with personal attendance if sufficient cause is shown (Sources: ["Mohammad Saquib Khan VS Directorate Of Enforcement - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 2410"], ["Tarsem Lal VS Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office - Supreme Court"], ["Mohammed Faruk Vs Union Of India, Rep. By Its Investigation Officer - Madras"]).
Power of Special Court - As a Court of Session, the Special Court under PMLA has the authority to grant exemption from personal appearance under Section 317 Cr.P.C., considering the nature of proceedings and the specific case context. The Court's discretion is guided by principles of fairness and judicial prudence, as emphasized in Maneka Sanjay Gandhi v. Rani Jethmalani, which advocates for a liberal exercise of exemption powers when warranted (Sources: ["Mohammad Saquib Khan VS Directorate Of Enforcement - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 2410"], ["Tarsem Lal VS Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office - Supreme Court"], ["Mohammed Faruk Vs Union Of India, Rep. By Its Investigation Officer - Madras"]).
Application in Practice - Courts have routinely rejected or granted exemptions under Section 317, depending on whether the accused demonstrates sufficient cause. The Court's discretion is exercised considering the facts, such as the accused's health, business commitments, or other circumstances, with the overarching aim of ensuring justice without compromising procedural integrity (Sources: ["Omkar Realtors And Developers Private Limited VS Adjudicating Authority, Prevention of Money Laundering Through Its Registrar - Delhi"], ["Rana Kapoor VS Directorate Of Enforcement - Delhi"]).
Limitations and Conditions - Exemptions are not automatic; the Court assesses the case-specific grounds. When an accused appears after summons, the Court may still issue warrants if they fail to remain present without exemption. The Court's decision is discretionary and subject to judicial review to prevent misuse (Sources: ["Tarsem Lal VS Directorate of Enforcement Jalandhar Zonal Office - Supreme Court"], ["Omkar Realtors And Developers Private Limited VS Adjudicating Authority, Prevention of Money Laundering Through Its Registrar - Delhi"]).
The power under Section 317 Cr.P.C. allows Special Courts under PMLA to grant exemptions from personal appearance, promoting judicial flexibility and fairness. Such exemptions are granted based on sufficient cause and are exercised liberally, aligning with judicial precedents and statutory provisions. This ensures that accused persons are not unduly burdened, especially when their presence is not critical to the proceedings, provided that procedural safeguards are maintained. The exercise of this power remains within the discretion of the Court, emphasizing fairness and case-specific considerations.
References:
In the complex world of money laundering prosecutions under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA), accused individuals often face the challenge of personal appearance requirements. A common query arises: Exemption granted under s 317 by Special Court PMLA Mumbai. This question highlights a critical aspect of procedural fairness in special courts handling PMLA matters. While personal attendance ensures accountability, courts recognize the need for flexibility to avoid undue hardship, especially in high-stakes cases.
This blog post explores the legal framework, judicial principles, and practical applications of exemptions under Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) in PMLA proceedings before Mumbai's Special Courts. We'll delve into key provisions, Supreme Court guidance, and real-world examples from related cases. Note: This is general information and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
Section 205 CrPC allows magistrates to dispense with personal attendance when issuing summons, permitting representation by a pleader. It extends to exemptions during inquiry or trial based on circumstances Mohammad Saquib Khan VS Directorate Of Enforcement - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 2410. Section 317 CrPC goes further, empowering courts at any stage of proceedings—including investigation, inquiry, or trial—to exempt the accused or witnesses from personal appearance Mohammad Saquib Khan VS Directorate Of Enforcement - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 2410.
These powers are not mutually exclusive but operate in tandem. The Supreme Court has clarified that both sections serve the same objectives: facilitating smooth proceedings without unnecessary harassment Mohammad Saquib Khan VS Directorate Of Enforcement - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 2410. Courts must exercise this discretion liberally, tailored to case facts, such as the accused's health, distance, or business needs.
In PMLA contexts, where proceedings involve serious allegations like money laundering under Sections 3 and 4, these CrPC provisions apply unless inconsistent with PMLA ARUN SHARMA VS UNION OF INDIA - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 3199. Section 65 PMLA explicitly states that CrPC provisions govern arrest, search, investigation, and proceedings insofar as they align with PMLA ARUN SHARMA VS UNION OF INDIA - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 3199.
The judiciary emphasizes judicious yet liberal application. The powers under Sections 205 and 317 Cr.P.C. are intended to achieve the same goals—ensuring the smooth conduct of proceedings and avoiding unnecessary harassment or inconvenience—and both operate to that end Mohammad Saquib Khan VS Directorate Of Enforcement - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 2410.
This principle holds in Special PMLA Courts. Discretion must balance justice interests, ensuring exemptions don't undermine trial integrity. Factors include:- Stage of proceedings (pre-trial, trial, etc.)- Accused's cooperation history- Representation adequacy by counsel- Potential prejudice to prosecution
Mumbai's Special Courts, designated under PMLA Section 43, handle cases like ECIR/MBZO-I/02/2019, where accused appeared voluntarily and secured bail C. Sivasankaran S/o R. Chinnakannan VS Foreigner Regional Registration Officer (FRRO) - 2019 Supreme(Mad) 2904. Exemption powers under Sections 205/317 remain available, promoting fairness in stringent PMLA regimes.
For instance, in territorial jurisdiction disputes, petitioners were directed to surrender before Mumbai's Special Court (PMLA Case No.4 of 2015), underscoring the court's authority over procedural matters WHITE WATER FOODS (P) LIMITED VS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, MUMBAI - 2018 Supreme(P&H) 1846. The Special Designated Court at Mumbai... is at liberty to decide the question of custody... within a period of four weeks from the date of surrender WHITE WATER FOODS (P) LIMITED VS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, MUMBAI - 2018 Supreme(P&H) 1846.
CrPC's applicability is affirmed: Provisions of CrPC would be applicable to offence under PMLA... Section 65 of PMLA stipulates that the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall apply... ARUN SHARMA VS UNION OF INDIA - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 3199. This includes bonds under Section 88 CrPC for voluntary appearances post-summons.
Exemptions aren't automatic. Courts deny them if they risk impairing proceedings or justice interests. Key limitations:- No undermining of trial or investigation- Case-specific facts must justify- Recorded reasons mandatory
Related bail scenarios illustrate. In a Mumbai PMLA case, bail was granted with travel restrictions, later modified as the right to travel abroad is an integral part of the right to life under Article 21 JABIN K. BASHEER vs ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOVT. OF INDIA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56360. Condition (c) was set aside, allowing travel subject to trial compliance.
Another case involved a Seychelles national in Mumbai PMLA proceedings; despite no arrest under Section 19 PMLA, a Look Out Circular was upheld due to foreign citizenship, distinguishing from Indian accused C. Sivasankaran S/o R. Chinnakannan VS Foreigner Regional Registration Officer (FRRO) - 2019 Supreme(Mad) 2904.
In custody matters, post-cognizance arrests require warrants, not Section 19 powers, reinforcing CrPC bonds for non-arrested accused ARUN SHARMA VS UNION OF INDIA - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 3199. Bail under Section 45 PMLA's rigors apply only to those arrested pre-cognizance.
To seek exemption:1. File timely applications with affidavits detailing reasons (e.g., medical, business abroad).2. Ensure counsel's presence and virtual options if allowed.3. Reference precedents like liberal exercise under Sections 205/317 Mohammad Saquib Khan VS Directorate Of Enforcement - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 2410.
Courts should:- Document reasons transparently.- Balance PMLA's stringency with Article 21 rights.- Avoid routine denials, per Supreme Court guidance.
In prolonged trials, like one with over three years' custody and attached properties, bail was granted emphasizing the power to refuse bail should not be used as a form of punishment Sayed Mohammed Masood VS Nilkanth Shelke - 2015 Supreme(Bom) 39.
Navigating PMLA requires understanding these nuances. While Mumbai Special Courts uphold procedural rigor, they prioritize fairness. For tailored advice, engage PMLA specialists.
References:- Mohammad Saquib Khan VS Directorate Of Enforcement - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 2410: Core on Sections 205/317 powers.- ARUN SHARMA VS UNION OF INDIA - 2016 Supreme(P&H) 3199: CrPC applicability to PMLA.- JABIN K. BASHEER vs ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOVT. OF INDIA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56360, C. Sivasankaran S/o R. Chinnakannan VS Foreigner Regional Registration Officer (FRRO) - 2019 Supreme(Mad) 2904, WHITE WATER FOODS (P) LIMITED VS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, MUMBAI - 2018 Supreme(P&H) 1846, Sayed Mohammed Masood VS Nilkanth Shelke - 2015 Supreme(Bom) 39: Contextual Mumbai cases.
#PMLA #Section317 #LegalExemption
For considering the submissions made at the bar it is essential to notice certain provisions of PMLA and Cr.P.C. 14. The power of trial of offences under Section 3 of PMLA is in exclusive domain of Special Courts constituted by virtue of Section 43 of the PMLA. ... The order further ignores that the Special Court was well and duly empowered to summon the applicant for appearing as and when, the Court desired even after grant of exemption according to....
That, a case under PMLA, 2002 was recorded vide ECIR/MBZO- II/03/2020 dated 07.02.2020 by the Enforcement Directorate, Mumbai Zonal Office- Il, Mumbai, against Mr. Anil Shivajirao Bhosale, Mr. Suryaji Pandurang Jadhav, Mr. Tanaji Dattu Padwal, Mr. ... In view thereof, the following order:- ORDER(a) The Applicant- Tanaji Dattu Padwal be released on bail in Special Case No.485 of 2021 registered in connection with EICR/MBZO-II/03/2020, registered at Mumbai Zonal Office-II, Mumbai, for t....
Counsels for the Petitioners have relied on the orders dated 24th August, 2022 passed by the Special Court under the PMLA, Greater Mumbai by which two of the directors/shareholders of the Petitioner Company, namely, Sh. Babulal Mulchand Varma and Sh. ... After that, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Spl.Leave to Appeal (Crl.)No.5720/2022, Babulal Varma & Anr. Vs. Enforcement Directorate, Mumbai & Anr. ... Counsel for the Petitioner informed the Court that the clos....
(d) In a case where the accused appears pursuant to a summons before the Special Court, on a sufficient cause being shown, the Special Court can grant exemption from personal appearance to the accused by exercising power under Section 205 of the Cr.P.C. ... A Special Court is a Court of Session. Therefore, Section 437 will not apply when an accused appears before the Special Court after a summons is issued on a co....
No. 1/2024 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for PMLA Cases (SPE/CBI-III), Ernakulam (‘Special Court’, for short), which has arisen from ECIR No. KCZ/08/2015, alleging the commission of the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Tarsem Lal v. ... However, by Annexure 3 order dated 03.12.2024, the Special Court has enlarged the petitioner on bail subject to the condition that he should not leave India without leave of the Special#HL_EN....
On Jan 19, 2024, the Special Court issued a 'Remand Order' without satisfying the mandatory compliance of Section 19 PMLA, which is blatant non-compliance qua 'Grounds of arrest' and 'Reasons to Believe.' ... Provided that the period of twenty-four hours shall exclude the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the (Special Court or) [Ins. by Act 13 of 2018, s. 208 (w.e.f. 19-4-2018)] Magistrate’s Court. ... Reasons to believe should be shown to the Speci....
ECIR/11/HIU 2021 dated 15.06.2021 under sections 44 and 45 PMLA for commission of offence of money laundering as defined under sections 3 and 4 of PMLA which is stated to be pending in the Court of Special Judge, PMLA, Rouse Avenue Courts. ... ECIR/11/HIU 2021 dated 15.06.2021 under sections 44 and 45 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “PMLA”) for commission of offence of money laundering as defined under sections 3 and 4 of PMLA w....
Before the Special Court, the petition under Section 317 Cr.P.C. was filed for dispensing with the appellant's presence on 30.01.2025. ... In the past one month, we are confronted with several orders of this Special Court, rejecting petitions filed by the accused under Section 317 Cr.P.C. ... As recorded earlier, we are being continuously confronted with several orders of the Special Court rejecting petitions under Section 317 Cr.P.....
Per contra, learned counsel for E.D submits that present petition is not a bail application under Section 45 of the PMLA; rather petitioner lays challenge to his arrest as well as the remand orders passed by the Special Court; therefore, this Court has very limited power of judicial review to quash arrest ... Needless to say that observations, made here-in-above, be not construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the complaint filed by the E.D under Section 44 read with Section 45 of the PMLA bef....
As a result thereof, this revision petition is allowed and accordingly, the impugned order passed by the learned Special Judge, PMLA Court is set aside. ... . - The petitioner has preferred this revision being crestfallen by the order dated 13.06.2023 passed by Special Judge (PMLA), Indore in S.C./1924/2018, whereby the learned Special Court allowed the applications of applicants' for releasing of property in lieu of fixed deposit. ... Learned Special#HL_EN....
Coming to know of this prosecution, the petitioner appeared before the Special Court for PMLA Cases, Mumbai and has been released on bail on 01.10.2019. This information has been provided by the Enforcement Directorate in their additional affidavit dated 20.09.2019. Apart from the aforesaid two cases, the Enforcement Directorate, Mumbai, registered a case in ECIR/MBZO-I/02/2019 under the PMLA and a complaint bearing no.6 of 2019 has been filed before the Special Court for PMLA Cases under Sections 44 and 45 of the PMLA against the petitioner and others in the Designated Court for P....
4. The Special Designated Court at Mumbai, after hearing both the parties in PMLA Case No.4 of 2015, is at liberty to decide the question of custody of the petitioners for custodial interrogation by the enforcement agency, within a period of four weeks from the date of surrender and make necessary orders; and 5. Respondent is directed to produce the present order before the Special Court (PMLA), Mumbai in PMLA case No.4 of 2015.
ECIR/14/MZO/2013 inter alia against M/s Namdhari Food International Pvt. Ltd., Shri Inder Singh Bal, Shri Iqbal Singh Bal, Shri Surjit Singh Bal, M/s. Namdhari Rice and General Mills, Shri Daljit Singh Bal, Shri Jaspal Singh Bal and Jai Singh Bal, collectively known as `Namdhari Group' of Sirsa, Haryana. There is no dispute on the fact that during the investigations under PMLA, these accused persons were not arrested by the authorities under section 19 of PMLA. After filing of Complaint, Process was issued by issuing summons to the accused including the aforesaid accused nos. The said ECIR w....
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Mumbai Branch, & Anr., as reported in 2014-TIOL-154-HC-MUM-IT at paragraph 6,7 & 8 has held as under : “6 The Act provides a period of sixty days to an assessee to file an appeal from the order of CIT (A) to the Tribunal. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of The Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai Vs.
Thane for the purpose of attending the Court/Courts in which cases against him are pending, or where his presence is required by any Investigating Agencies in connection with the investigation. This condition, however, shall not operate when the appellant would be required to leave the limits of Brihan Mumbai and District 1. The applicant is one of the accused in PMLA Special Case No.1 of 2013 pending before the Special Court constituted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (for short, 'PMLA Act'), at Mumbai. The applicant shall not leave the limits ....
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
