TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Enforcement Directorate must file Final Form post-investigation to ensure transparency and judicial scrutiny</h1> <h3>Shiv Kant Tripathi Versus State of U.P. & others</h3> Shiv Kant Tripathi Versus State of U.P. & others - TMI Issues Involved:1. Whether the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is required to file the Final Form before the designated Court.2. The investigation of scheduled offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002.3. The role of the Special Cell, Economic Offences Wing, and the ED in the investigation.4. The submission of periodic reports by the ED and the Special Cell to the Court.5. The completion of the investigation in a time-bound manner.Detailed Analysis:1. Whether the Enforcement Directorate (ED) is required to file the Final Form before the designated Court:The Court examined whether the ED must submit a Final Form after completing its investigation under the Money-Laundering Act. It was argued by the ED that there is no provision in the Money-Laundering Act for filing a Final Form when no material is found against an accused. However, the Court referred to Section 65 of the Money-Laundering Act, which states that the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Code) shall apply to the investigation, insofar as they are not inconsistent with the Money-Laundering Act. The Court found that the term 'investigation' as defined in the Code includes the submission of a final report. The Court cited the Supreme Court case of H.N. Rishbud and another vs. State of Delhi, which clarified that investigation includes the formation of an opinion and the filing of a charge-sheet under Section 173 of the Code. The Court concluded that the ED is required to submit a Final Form before the designated Court to ensure judicial scrutiny and transparency.2. The investigation of scheduled offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002:The case involved allegations against a respondent for misusing his official position and engaging in money laundering. The F.I.R. was lodged alleging the commission of scheduled offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Money-Laundering Act. The Court noted that the investigation of scheduled offences by the State police had been completed, and a Final Form was submitted before the concerned Magistrate. The ED was directed to investigate the money-laundering allegations. The Court emphasized that the ED's investigation should continue only if the Magistrate rejects the police's final report and issues a process or directs further investigation.3. The role of the Special Cell, Economic Offences Wing, and the ED in the investigation:The Court had earlier directed that the investigation papers be entrusted to the ED for a thorough probe, considering the national ramifications of the case. The Special Cell, Economic Offences Wing, was also involved in the investigation. The Court reiterated that the ED, being a central agency, was appropriate for carrying out a thorough investigation. The Court directed the ED to submit a status report within one month after receiving the investigation papers.4. The submission of periodic reports by the ED and the Special Cell to the Court:The petitioner sought a direction for the ED and the Special Cell to submit periodic reports on the investigation's stage, status, and manner. The Court had earlier directed the ED to continue investigating the money-laundering matter and to inform the Court about the investigation's progress. The Court emphasized the need for transparency and judicial scrutiny in the investigation process.5. The completion of the investigation in a time-bound manner:The petitioner requested a direction for the investigation to be completed in a time-bound manner. The Court directed that if the process is issued by the Magistrate or upon further investigation a charge-sheet is submitted in respect of any scheduled offence, the ED must submit the Final Form before the designated Court within two months from the date of knowledge of the same. This direction aimed to ensure timely completion of the investigation and judicial scrutiny of the investigation's outcome.Conclusion:The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the ED to submit the Final Form before the designated Court within two months in case of contingencies, ensuring judicial scrutiny and transparency in the investigation process. The Court emphasized the applicability of the Code to the investigation under the Money-Laundering Act and the necessity for the ED to file a final report to avoid excessive discretion and lack of transparency.
TaxTMI 